Rights and Liberties

Protecting your rights, habeas corpus, torture, death penalty, eavesdropping, spying, no-fly lists. Comprehensive Rights & Liberties coverage available here.

At Netroots, Pelosi Ducks Impeachment; Gore Calls for National Grassroots Movement
Posted by Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet on July 19, 2008 at 10:20 AM.

Former Vice President Al Gore, who made a surprise appearance at the "Ask The Speaker" session at the Netroots Nation conference, urged those in attendance to help him create a national grassroots movement to counter corporate interests and others ignoring the global climate crisis.

Gore said the Bush Administration's call for new offshore drilling was akin to giving alcoholics another drink. Gore's prescription was for Americans to rebuild the country's electricity infrastructure so in a decade that system was fed by renewable fuels, a mix of solar, wind, thermal storage and geothermal technologies. He said the car industry would be forced to follow the rest of the country.

"The easiest and cheapest way to shift over to a new energy is to start with electricity," Gore said. "Cars will follow. A new national grid is the centerpiece of this agenda. We have to switch our electricity generation system to get 100 percent from renewable sources."

"We can do it, but I need your help," Gore said, urging the bloggers to encourage people to join his new organization, wecansolveit.org. The group has 1.3 million members, but Gore said it needs 10 million members to counter corporate and political opposition to real change - even if a Democratic president and Congress is elected in the fall.

"I need your help," Gore said. "You speak to and connect with so many millions of people. I ask for you help to build that group of people. You will not see this organization getting partisan or turning to some other agenda. We will not back down."

ARREST KARL ROVE

The organizers of Netroots Nation created an "Ask the Speaker" website where people voted on the questions they most wanted to ask Pelosi. Impeachment topped the list. Pelosi did not reply directly, but instead said the House Judiciary Committee Chairman, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) would be pursuing a contempt of Congress resolution against Rove, just as it had with other White House staffers who did not testify when ordered to do so by House committees.

"Now the committee is considering contempt for Karl Rove," she said. "That will be up for the committee to decide. Mr. Conyers says I am in charge and I accept that."

When another questioner asked if Rove should be in the Capitol's jail, Pelosi replied, "That's where he belongs. As Mr. Conyers says, 'leave it up to me.'"

Pelosi also defended the recently-passed FISA bill, which deals with how the federal government can monitor the personal communications of U.S. Citizens when fighting terrorism. She said the House's version of the recently passed bill did not grant retroactive immunity for telecom companies that helped the government spy on what some believe is million of Americans. But she said House Democrats could do little when 17 Democratic senators sided with their Republican colleagues and supported a version of the bill that gave telecom companies retroactive immunity.

She said the bill that was passed, the product of a conference committee, included the immunity but also for the first time brought oversight of the FISA law to two House committees and the Inspector General's office, which she said was some progress.

"I'll never understand how Dem 17 senators voted with the GOP on FISA," Pelosi said. "I have serious sadness over two things in the congress. One is that they sent us the (Senate) FISA bill and that we could not overcome 60 votes in the Senate to end the war in Iraq."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Send Karl Rove to Jail
Posted by Liliana Segura, AlterNet on July 18, 2008 at 12:24 PM.

Earlier this afternoon, on the premiere episode of Brave New Films' new show, Meet the Bloggers, I joined Firedoglake's resident Karl Rove expert Marcy Wheeler, along with Baratunde Thurston of Jack and Jill Politics to discuss a question most of us can probably agree on: Should Karl Rove Go to Jail? For so many reasons, I said "yes." But ultimately, the real issue up for discussion was not whether he should be held accountable, it is whether there is any chance on earth he will.

Many others have written intelligently and at length about Karl Rove's recent no-show before the House Judiciary Committee -- most notably Marcy, who has blogged exhaustively on the whole thing. But the short of it is this: The HJC issued a subpoena for Rove back in May. He had until July 10 to appear, to discuss, broadly speaking, his role in the vast politicization of the Department of Justice (which includes the U.S. attorney firings, the illegal hiring practices at the DoJ, and the prosecution of Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman.) Instead, Rove had his lawyer send the committee a letter, dated July 1, in which he "respectfully" refused to appear, claiming immunity -- a sort of "executive privilege on steroids" according to one highly reliable source -- and, just to be especially villainous and brazen, skipped town.

Watch this short video for a crash course. The main point? Karl Rove broke the law.

"By ignoring the Judiciary Committee subpoena," House Judiciary Chair John Conyers wrote on Huffington Post, "Karl Rove and the White House once again showed their utter disregard for our system of checks and balances, for Congress as a co-equal branch of government, and ultimately for the American people."

The question that now confronts the Judiciary Committee and, ultimately, the full House of Representatives, is what action to take in the face of such blatant defiance of the rule of law. As Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I am considering all options.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Ban on HIV+ Visitors and Immigrants in the U.S. is One Step Closer to Being Repealed
Posted by Melissa McEwan, Shakesville on July 17, 2008 at 2:00 PM.

Hello, Progress -- nice to see you again:

The U.S. Senate has approved repeal of a law barring HIV-positive visitors and immigrants from entering the country. The measure was included in legislation reauthorizing PEPFAR, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief.

The ban repeal measure was tacked onto the bill by Sens. John Kerry (D-MA) and Gordon Smith (R-OR) despite an effort by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) to block it.

PEPFAR passed the Senate with the Kerry-Smith provision by a vote of 80 to 16 and now moves to conference committee before being sent to the President.

…Gay and HIV/AIDS rights advocates have been fighting for repeal of the ban for more than a decade. The battle now focuses on keeping the language intact while PEPFAR moves through conference.

"We call on the leaders of the House and Senate to retain the Kerry-Smith provision in conference and ensure it is included in the final legislation sent to the President’s desk," said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.

Aside from its intrinsic and immediate value if the repeal is signed into law, it's also a good first step toward undoing the immigration policy that prevents HIV+ foreign nationals from obtaining legal permanent residency in the US -- which itself is necessarily tied to any reform of the fiancée/marriage visa laws to include same-sex couples.

Even Gay Out-of-Towners May Be Able to Marry in Mass.
Posted by Habladora, Feministe on July 17, 2008 at 7:18 AM.

According to NPR’s Morning Edition:

In Massachusetts, the Senate has voted to repeal an old law that has been used to keep out-of-state couples from marrying in the state. The law prohibits couples from getting marriage licenses if they can’t legally wed in their home states. Gay and lesbian couples from across the nation may soon be able to get married in Massachusetts.

The century-old law that this vote could help repeal was initially instated as a measure aimed at preventing interracial marriages, according to Marc Solomon of MassEquality.

Now, once the Massachusetts House votes on the issue and the new law is signed by Governor Deval Patrick, Massachusetts could become a popular wedding destination for gay couples whose states of residence still haven’t legalized same-sex marriage. Since Massachusetts has already withstood an attempt to ban same-sex marriage, it might become an even more tempting wedding destination than California, which will face such a vote this fall. This new popularity could even translate into a substantial boost for Massachusetts’s economy. See, sometimes being good really does pay off!

Congratulations, Massachusetts! Here’s hoping lots of states follow in your footsteps!

Fourth Circuit Court Ruling Gives Bush Dictatorial Powers
Posted by Steven D., Booman Tribune on July 17, 2008 at 4:39 AM.

Quick note from Joshua H: The headline on this piece was based on my December interview with the Center for Constitutional Rights' Michael Ratner -- who has fought like hell against Bush's claimed war powers. Ratner told me, "The difference between a police state and a nonpolice state is, fundamentally, whether the executive can pick you up and disappear you or whether you can go to a court and challenge the executive, whether you can say: 'What's the legal reason you're holding me?'"

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (one level below the Supreme Court) has just ruled that Bush was granted the unlimited power by Congress to detain indefinitely anyone in the United States (you, me, your teenage son or daughter, anyone at all) merely be declaring them an enemy combatant. In a split 5-4 decision the Fourth Circuit also held that said enemy combatant was permitted to "challenge" that detention, but failed to elaborate on what form that challenge should take. From the NY Times:

President Bush has the legal power to order the indefinite military detentions of civilians captured in the United States, the federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., ruled on Tuesday in a fractured 5-to-4 decision.

But a second, overlapping 5-to-4 majority of the court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, ruled that Ali al-Marri, a citizen of Qatar now in military custody in Charleston, S.C., must be given an additional opportunity to challenge his detention in federal court there. An earlier court proceeding, in which the government had presented only a sworn statement from a defense intelligence official, was inadequate, the second majority ruled. [...]

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

WTF? Newsweek Says We Should Pardon Officials Who Sanctioned Torture
Posted by Brad , Sadly No! on July 16, 2008 at 1:04 PM.

So I tried to escape the toxic levels of wingnuttery this evening by flipping through my roommate's copy of Newsweek. Amazingly, I flipped to page 36 and found this:

The Truth About Torture

To get a full accounting of how U.S. interrogation methods were used, the president should give those accused of 'war crimes' a pass.

By Stuart Taylor Jr. | NEWSWEEK

Dark deeds have been conducted in the name of the United States government in recent years: the gruesome, late-night circus at Abu Ghraib, the beating to death of captives in Afghanistan, and the officially sanctioned waterboarding and brutalization of high-value Qaeda prisoners. Now demands are growing for senior administration officials to be held accountable and punished. Congressional liberals, human-rights groups and other activists are urging a criminal investigation into high-level "war crimes," including the Bush administration's approval of interrogation methods considered by many to be torture.

It's a bad idea. In fact, President George W. Bush ought to pardon any official from cabinet secretary on down who might plausibly face prosecution for interrogation methods approved by administration lawyers.

Question: why did we ever develop the Geneva Conventions in the first place? Why does the Constitution ban cruel and unusual punishment? Hell, for that matter, why did we ever sign the goddamn Magna Carta*? Because what Stuart Taylor, Jr. is telling us is that government officials should simply be able to break the fucking law. And not just the laws against lying about blowjobs under oath -- we're talking about laws against goddamn torture. We're talking about laws that for years have prohibited the government from performing cruel and heinous acts on prisoners. This is important shit. But to Stuart Taylor? Pfffffft, yeah it's bad, but so what? We'll only learn the truth about this stuff if we just pardon everyone beforehand. Because fuck it, laws are only meant to be obeyed by the little people.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Scientist Under Fire From Religious Right Still Says a "Cracker is Nothing"
Posted by AlterNet Staff, AlterNet on July 16, 2008 at 10:00 AM.

A few days ago, over 120 reader comments appeared on a post titled "Christian Lunatics Issue Death Threats Over a Cracker". Yesterday, the Minnesota Independent ran an interview with the author of the post, PZ Myers (the unfortunate headline called Myers an "unrepentant heathen" -- an odd construct, no?). Here's a taste:

Once a Lutheran altar boy, University of Minnesota biology professor Morris P.Z. Myers has fallen from grace -- at least in the eyes of some Catholics and the conservative Catholic League. One of the more prominent atheist voices in America, Myers wrote a blog post on the furor sparked by a Florida college student who smuggled a communion wafer out of mass and, once found out, received threats of harm and death. Catholics believe the bread, once blessed by a priest, has been transformed into the substance of Christ's body and blood. Myers doesn't buy it. He wrote that if readers of his blog send him a consecrated host, "I'll show you sacrilege, gladly, and with much fanfare."

I reached him this morning to discuss the controversy that has resulted in several thousand comments at his blog -- some calling him a "Jewboy," others announcing his need for prayer, and still others calling for his death.

Minnesota Independent: The incident with college student Webster Cook comes as religious passions everywhere are incredibly inflamed -- Shiites and Sunnis, Evangelicals and atheists, etc. Does this say anything about the state of religion?

PZ Myers: I think this is a symptom of the weakness of the religious in this country right now. Religion is actually fading a little bit. It's still strong,and it's still out there and there's still a vocal political realm, but I think people know that there are people actively challenging religion now.

I think there's also a growing discontent with what the religious have done in politics.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

NPR Has a Good Laugh Over Torture
Posted by Steve M., No More Mister Nice Blog on July 16, 2008 at 6:00 AM.

We can sneer at Rush Limbaugh and his Club G'itmo, but this morning on The Takeaway, public radio's insipid new morning pseudo-news show, a significant amount of airtime was devoted to a segment called "The Songs That Torture Us" -- a response to the well-known list of songs blasted at detainees in U.S. military prisons, which Mother Jones recently published as a sidebar to some serious articles on torture. This means that for many minutes this morning, all us good liberals in the public radio audience were regaled by a discussion of torture that reduced the issue to "Which would be a more effective song to torture you -- 'Billy, Don't Be a Hero" or 'You Light Up My Life'?"

(Listen here.)

Judging from the e-mails to the show, it appears that more listeners happily played along than objected to the segment.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Defense Lawyer Drops His Pants to Demonstrate Abuse at Guantánamo
Posted by Ben, Think Progress on July 15, 2008 at 8:57 AM.

David H. Remes, an American lawyer representing 15 Yemenis currently challenging their detention at Guantánamo Bay, recently made his seventh trip to Yemen to meet with his clients' families and "to do what I can to promote the cause of these men."

During a recent press conference in Yemen, Remes promoted their cause by "demonstrating the mistreatment" and humiliation suffered by his clients at the U.S. detention facility in Cuba.

Catholic League President Believes Atheists Should Have No Rights
Posted by Amanda Marcotte, Pandagon on July 14, 2008 at 10:04 AM.

Editor's note: for background, see Christian Lunatics Issue Death Threats Over a Cracker

That’s what I’ve come to believe.  It’s obvious that he thinks that “religious freedom” means “the right to demand a) the right to completely define an entire religion for yourself and eject anyone who has different views than yours and b) the right never, ever to be mocked, criticized, or looked at funny”.  But even when a number of atheists online were insisting that I was targeted by the Catholic League for harassment and economic hardship-distribution because I’m an outspoken atheist, I was skeptical.  Nah, a believer could have totally made the jokes I did and get abused, I thought.  I have no idea of Melissa McEwan believes in some kind of god, and she got it, too. 

But watching this whole thing with PZ Myers go down (sorry I’m late to the party; been too busy to follow stuff, you know), I’m inclined increasingly to think that while the Catholic League will go after anyone---and that they do love to spank actual Catholics for diverging from Donohue-defined doctrine, which is far to the right of even what the pope will have you believe---they’re on the move against atheists now that atheism is getting a new heyday/publishing bonanza.  Quoth Lindsay: 

The Catholic League claims to be a civil rights organization. Yet it consistently targets high-profile atheists like Amanda Marcotte and PZ Myers and attempts to get them fired.  Draw your own conclusions.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

"Terrorist" Watch-List Hits One Million Names
Posted by AlterNet Staff, AlterNet on July 14, 2008 at 8:57 AM.

This is from the ACLU:

The nation's terrorist watch list has hit one million names, according to a tally maintained by the American Civil Liberties Union based upon the government's own reported numbers for the size of the list.

"Members of Congress, nuns, war heroes and other `suspicious characters,' with names like Robert Johnson and Gary Smith, have become trapped in the Kafkaesque clutches of this list, with little hope of escape," said Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "Congress needs to fix it, the Terrorist Screening Center needs to fix it, or the next president needs to fix it, but it has to be done soon."

Fredrickson and Barry Steinhardt, director of the ACLU's Technology and Liberty Program, spoke today along with two victims of the watch list: Jim Robinson, former assistant attorney general for the Civil Division who flies frequently and is often delayed for hours despite possessing a governmental security clearance and Akif Rahman, an American citizen who has been detained and interrogated extensively at the U.S.-Canada border when traveling for business.

"America's new million record watch list is a perfect symbol for what's wrong with this administration's approach to security: it's unfair, out-of-control, a waste of resources, treats the rights of the innocent as an afterthought, and is a very real impediment in the lives of millions of travelers in this country," said Barry Steinhardt, director of the ACLU Technology and Liberty Program. "It must be fixed without delay."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Blogger Fired After Criticizing US Attorney
Posted by Lindsay Beyerstein, Raw Story on July 11, 2008 at 3:00 PM.

This 'case is definitely about the first amendment,' says Harper's journalist

The abrupt dismissal of a veteran University of Alabama employee who blogged about the firing of seven US Attorneys has added a bizarre new twist to allegations that the state's US Attorneys targeted political opponents for prosecution.

Roger Shuler -- a high-profile blogger and leading critic of Alabama's judicial system -- has written extensively about alleged corruption among U.S. Attorneys for over a year. In particular, Shuler focused on two US Attorneys from his home state: Alice H. Martin of the Northern District and Leura G. Canary of the Middle District.

An editor in the University of Alabama Birmingham publications office for the last 12 years and a university employee for 19, Shuler was placed on administrative leave May 7 and formally fired May 19.

[Read the rest at Raw Story.]