Bill of Rights archive at FraudWasteAbuse

Archive for the 'Bill of Rights' Category

Mar

Even the Nazis got a trial

By FraudWasteAbuse 2 Comments

Categories: news, politics, Iraq, War on Terror, law, terrorism, government, Republicans, war, Afghanistan, Bill of Rights, drugs, rights, Bush, civil rights, liberty, constitution, fascism, Nazis, Guantanamo, War on Drugs, Guantanamo Bay, Hitler and Nazi

Even the worst of the Nazis got a trial, even though the trial was a sham. The indictments were created ex post facto and were not based on any nation’s law. Even US Supreme Court Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone called the Nuremberg trials a fraud. But I digress.

The top Nazis could get a trial despite plunging Europe into its most destructive war and caused the deaths of tens of millions of people. Yet the detainees in Guantanamo Bay are somehow undeserving of a trial because they’re too barbaric, or happened to be kidnapped and sold to the Americans for a cash reward. Forgive me if I think the Nazis were a bit more dangerous and barbaric than some religious fanatics upset that a foreign military started shooting up their country.

Supporters of detaining alleged terrorists without trial posit that we did the same things with captured Germans and Japanese during World War II. The problem with trying to classify captured terrorists as prisoners of war is that we are not at war. Terrorism is still considered a federal crime, and sending the military to fight the crime of terrorism doesn’t make us any more at war than sending the military to fight drug cartels makes us at war. The government doesn’t consider arrested drug dealers to be POWs, nor does declaring a “War on Drugs ” strip accused drug dealers of their right to a fair trial.

Mar

NSA wiretapping Americans without a warrant

By FraudWasteAbuse 8 Comments

Categories: news, politics, War on Terror, terrorism, government, crime, Bill of Rights, rights, Bush, civil rights, NSA, spying, wiretapping and warrantless

I’d hate to think that my fellow Americans would be so gullible as to believe the government’s promises that it was not going to use terrorist legislation against American citizens. Of course when the government makes justifications for overstepping its [digg=http://digg.com/politics/NSA_wiretapping_Americans_without_a_warrant]constitutional bounds to gain “tools” to combat whatever the latest bogeyman happens to be, one can be sure that those same “tools” will soon be used on everyday Americans.

In the latest example, it seems that there was a bit of a screw-up at the NSA and a Washington, DC lawyer was accidentally mailed a log of his private phone calls. Hilarity ensues:

It could be a scene from Kafka or Brazil. Imagine a government agency, in a bureaucratic foul-up, accidentally gives you a copy of a document marked “top secret.” And it contains a log of some of your private phone calls.

You read it and ponder it and wonder what it all means. Then, two months later, the FBI shows up at your door, demands the document back and orders you to forget you ever saw it.

By all accounts, that’s what happened to Washington D.C. attorney Wendell Belew in August 2004. And it happened at a time when no one outside a small group of high-ranking officials and workaday spooks knew the National Security Agency was listening in on Americans’ phone calls without warrants. Belew didn’t know what to make of the episode. But now, thanks to that government gaffe, he and a colleague have the distinction of being the only Americans who can prove they were specifically eavesdropped upon by the NSA’s surveillance program.

The pair are seeking $1 million each in a closely watched lawsuit against the government, which experts say represents the greatest chance, among over 50 different lawsuits, of convincing a key judge to declare the program illegal.

Read the rest here.

Feb

To whom does the US Constitution apply?

By FraudWasteAbuse 26 Comments

Categories: politics, Islam, Iraq, War on Terror, terrorism, government, war, Bill of Rights, rights, Bush, civil rights, liberty and constitution

There is a great debate in the United States over whether or not terrorists have the same rights as American citizens, or even if terrorists have any rights under the Constitution at all. President Bush has maintained that captured terrorists are enemy combatants, and do not have the rights an privileges guaranteed by the Constitution. Bush is so adamant that terrorists do not have rights under US law that they are imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay, where Cuba technically has sovereignty even though the United States has effective legal control.

Another popular claim is that captured terrorists are actually prisoners of war. Prisoners of war do not typically get to challenge their detention and so captured terrorists must be held until hostilities have ceased.

Some even go as far as claiming that not even illegal immigrants have rights under the Constitution, because the Constitution only applies to American citizens.

There are several flaws in these claims. I’ll address the first one in this post and cover the others later. First, let’s evaluate the notion that non-Americans do not have constitutional rights. If one reads through the Constitution it becomes apparent that all references to “citizens” in the Constitution have nothing to do with the rights of the people. Most references are rules as to how one can participate in the political/election process. In fact, the Bill of Rights makes no distinctions between citizens and non-citizens.

Consider this: How can we be sure of our government’s claims that a suspected foreign terrorist is indeed a foreign terrorist until that person has had a fair and impartial trial to determine his status? What is to prevent an American citizen from being arrested, detained, and accused of being a foreign terrorist? That person would have no way to confront his accusers and prove his innocence.

This leads me to my conclusion. In truth, the Constitution does not apply to non-Americans. It doesn’t even apply to American citizens. The Constitution is a contract between the federal government and the states, and thus applies to the federal government. The Constitution itself is a list of rules and powers of the federal government. It is specifically enumerated and if it isn’t listed, the government isn’t allowed to do it. The Bill of Rights is a list of things the federal government may not do. Nowhere does it make an exception for non-citizens, terrorism, etc.

Feb

Alabama’s dildo police

By FraudWasteAbuse 4 Comments

Categories: politics, sex, government, Bill of Rights, Alabama, civil rights and liberty

Now I’m no coneisseur of dildos or vibrators, but I’m happy to report that the government of Alabama is using its taxpayers’ dollars well. Instead of focusing on petty issues, such as murder and rape, the public servants of Alabama have vigorously defended its decision to ban the commerical sale sex toys in the state…and won their case in front of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals:

MONTGOMERY — A federal appeals court issued a Valentine’s Day ruling upholding an Alabama law banning the sale of sex toys. But the devices won’t disappear from store shelves, including at one Decatur store, immediately.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Alabama’s sex toy ban is constitutional because “the state’s interest in preserving and promoting public morality provides a rational basis for the challenged statue.”

Hmm. I wonder how the court reasons that the state, an intangible and inanimate entity, can have interests? The truth is that the state does not have “interests”. Only individuals have interests. In reality, claiming that something is in the “state interest” or “national interest” is simply a government employee imposing his or her interests on you.

The lead plaintiff, Sherri Williams, said she was disappointed the 11th Circuit dated its ruling “on the very day this nation celebrates romance.”

Of course, this ruling could not have fallen on a more appropriate date, February 14th — reminding us that we should all look to the state to be the final judge of what kind of sex we can have behind closed doors.

I saved the best (scariest) part for last:

In previous appeals to the 11th Circuit, Williams and her attorneys had argued that the law was an unconstitutional intrusion into bedrooms, but the 11th Circuit held there was no fundamental right to use sexual devices.

That is a pretty bold assertion. If one completely ignores the Ninth Amendment as the 11th Circuit has, such an opinion by the court has far reaching ramifications. If it is the court’s opinion that there is no fundamental right to use sexual devices, then what devices do the people have a right to use? Using this pattern of logic, there is no fundamental right to use anything. The state is in complete control of your life and the legality of anything is at its whim.

Welcome to America. Land of the free.

Feb

The Passengers’ Bill of Rights vs. the real Bill of Rights

By FraudWasteAbuse 1 Comment

Categories: politics, government, Bill of Rights, flying, airline, fascism, JetBlue, plane and TSA

I’m sure most of you have heard about the JetBlue passengers who were stranded on the runway for 10 hours on Valentine’s Day. If not, you can read about it here.

Every time something like this happens, one can inevitably hear calls for a Passengers’ Bill of Rights from the outraged. Unfortunately, those of us who actually value liberty are disappointed at the lack of outrage concerning the blatant disregard for the original Bill of Rights at the airport. You know, the one that’s in the Constitution? [digg=http://www.digg.com/political_opinion/The_Passengers_Bill_of_Rights_vs_the_real_Bill_of_Rights]

Much of your airport experience is regulated by the Transportation Security Administration, or TSA. The TSA is a federal agency created in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks. Before this, airport security was handled by private companies. The TSA’s main jobs are to make sure airports are secure and to prevent airline hijacking. Whether or not the TSA is actually effective at doing their job is the subject of another post.

While there is outrage at the incredibly rare occasion when passengers are stuck on a runway for hours on end, it seems that most people have no qualms about surrendering their constitutional rights just to travel from point A to point B.

A trip to the airport usually voids your first amendment rights. God forbid someone makes a joke about a bomb. That person may well find himself detained with a hefty fine. Even writing an insult on one’s toiletry bag can get one detained.

You can forget about your second amendment rights as well. Large signs at the airport warn travelers that the government doesn’t look too kindly on those who would exercise their constitutional right to bear arms.

Your fourth amendment rights are thrown out the window as well. Everyone at the airport is searched like a criminal and no warrants are obtained.

Fifth amendment rights are routinely violated. It protects people from being “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” However, personal property is routinely confiscated at the airport without due process.

Eighth amendment protection against excessive fines is ignored, as passengers can be fined up to $10,000 for violating TSA rules. Also, don’t bother carrying over $10,000 in cash to the airport. Thanks to our draconian drug laws, the cash will be confiscated under the assumptions that anyone carrying that much cash must be up to no good.

Of course, we are all told that this is all being done for the public good. Unfortunately, the government is the last entity that I trust to make decisions affecting the “public good.”