Gov't Puts Witness On No Fly List, Then Denies Having Done So 462
cathyreisenwitz sends word of a San Francisco trial in which the U.S. government appears to be manipulating the no-fly list to its advantage. The court case involves a Stanford Ph.D. student who was barred from returning to the U.S. after visiting her native Malaysia. She's one of roughly 700,000 people on the no-fly list. Here's the sketchy part: the woman's eldest daughter, who was born in the U.S. and is a U.S. citizen, was called as a witness for the trial. Unfortunately, she mysteriously found herself on the no-fly list as well, and wasn't able to board a plane to come to the trial. Lawyers for the Department of Justice told the court that she simply missed her plane, but she was able to provide documents from the airline explaining that the Department of Homeland Security was not allowing her to fly.
Southwest.. (Score:5, Insightful)
You are no longer free to move about the country.
Re:Southwest.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course you're free to move, citizen. You just need to present the proper papers, which you're not eligible for.
Re:Southwest.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Papers, Please [papersplea.se].
Re:Southwest.. (Score:5, Insightful)
I've once read an article by a guy who managed to escape a dictatorship. He said that no country truly appreciates freedom until it's gone through a few decades of fascism and/or of a dictatorship of the proletariat. It seems it's time for the USA to have such an "enlightening" experience. The good side: afterwards things will improve. The bad thing: a restoration usually happens only two or more generations down the line.
Well, at least your grandchildren will see it.
Re:Southwest.. (Score:5, Insightful)
You are quite the optimist. With today's technology, a locked down population is unlikely to be able to throw of the yoke of tyranny. And, government will be improving on today's technology, of course. Given a few decades of round the clock surveillance, mandatory forced indoctrination in the school system, and enforced thought policing, how are people ever going to regain their freedom?
If the US falls to tyranny, there will be something equivalent to Europe's Dark Ages. It will be a long, long, LONG time before the pendulum swings back the other way.
Re:Southwest.. (Score:5, Funny)
but it also empowers the week
It also empowers the month and year, as well as the day, hour, minute, and second.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The internet is only "empowering" because they allow it. Which means it is not empowering at all, because they are not actually threatened by it.
It is easy to turn it off, just pull a plug. And they haven't even begun the process of locking it down. Once they mandate authentication as a prerequisite for access it's pretty much game over. Try using your phone anonymously! Seriously, would you use your phone to plan a terrorist attack? Soon the entire internet will be like that, whether we like it or not, a
Re:Southwest.. (Score:4, Insightful)
The people in 1933 Germany probably thought things wouldn't get so bad either.
And it's not going to be Arab-Americans who are hurting, it'll be regular, everyday Americans. It's not Nazi Germany the US is becoming like, it's East Germany after the war was over, all the way until ~1990. The Nazi regime didn't last long, but the East German government lasted for about 45 years. It didn't oppress some disliked minority, it oppressed everyone; did you forget what happened to people who tried to escape? Restrictions on travel and movement are standard with oppressive Stalinist regimes, and the US is resembling that more and more every day (though a little different, since a lot of the power rests in corporations rather than a central government).
Re:Southwest.. (Score:5, Interesting)
The Nazi regime didn't last long, because it started war after war until it was everyone's enemy - sounds familiar? And East German government lasted for 45 years because it had the backing of a greater power, and fell pretty much instantly when that backing failed.
Anyway, the US doesn't really resemble either. Nazis and Communists were ideology-based tyrants, while the US looks more like a failing state: the economy continues getting worse, everyone loots as much of the pie as they can to themselves and their friends, tribalism rises, the state tries to compensate with ever-increasing internal security (both surveillance and "though" penalties), the rulers mostly live in and react to their own little world... It's the standard "rot from the inside" pattern of collapse, with the "blinded by past glories" flavour.
Re:Southwest.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Southwest.. (Score:5, Insightful)
The US really does not resemble either the DDR or USSR in any way.
Of course it does, it just hasn't gotten really bad, yet. The US is absolutely an imperialist superpower, just like the old USSR, using threats of force to get other countries to bow to its will and routinely sending its army to invade other countries to control resources and establish hegemony, and now it's spying on all its citizens just like the Stasi did in the DDR. It's not a big step from there to abusing all that power and routinely oppressing regular citizens.
Re:Southwest.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry to be A/C but as someone with experience with the DDR, listen to Grishnakh. The US is playing a very dangerous game, and it's a game which cannot be won.
You should not fear the people in power on the day your privacy and freedom are first lost. It's the assholes who come later with bold plans to abuse the new powers who your children will learn to fear.
It took decades after their rights were removed until the full perversity of the brown shirts grew to be what it was. But thought crimes became a real offense and listening to forbidden radio could make your dad dissapear without recourse when they stormed your house in the night. When your child was sick you weren't alowed to visit in hospital. Going to church would land you on a watch list in an athiest country, and you had to lie every day about your thoughts and ideas to preserve the safety of your family. And there are many places in the world today where people still suffer under this form of opression so one needs to remember that it is very real.
American ignorance is to think that "it happened over there but it can never happen here".
Wake up. Humans are humans; you should never give them power over each other because they will abuse it in the name of whatever stupid ideology they feel is "best for you". It won't matter what you think if you're on the bottom.
Every indication as far as I can tell is that the strong foundation of liberty and protected freedoms that made the USA great is being steadilly broken down and removed, brick by brick.
Re: (Score:3)
The modus operendi of the Stasi was based solely on technological restrictions. The important part was that everybody felt like they where watched and monitored. The number of IMs (Inoffizieller Mittarbeiter = unofficial employee) was way lower than most people thought and that was the entire point. (1 in 10 is still awesomely high though.) The main goal was to make organised dissension impossible. When it all fell together it showed that the Stasi's power was solely based on intimidation.
Today you simply d
Re:Southwest.. (Score:5, Informative)
The US DID intern Arab-Americans in the week after 9/11, in mass roundups and arrests, and almost all of them were later released without charge nor apology. Then the government began a series of interrogations, fingerprinting, and in many cases deportation [nytimes.com] proceedings in 2002 for thousands of Arab and Muslim green card holders and immigrant families.
It wasn't just Arab-Americans (Score:4, Interesting)
My coworker, who was from Pakistan, didn't get interned, but he did get hauled in to show his papers. I think he had a green card at the time; he's a citizen now. But Muslim, so that made him suspicious, even though he's non-political.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Lincoln, who freed the slaves, was a Republican; in fact, he was the first Republican president. Nathan Bedford Forrest, a Democrat, helped to found the KKK and was its first Grand Wizard. Virtually all of the authors of "Jim Crow" legislation after the Civil War were Democrats. Democrat Senator Richard Byrd, who died only a few years ago, cut his teeth on politics as the Grand Kleagle of the Klan. Sheriff "Bull" Connor was not only a Democrat, he was a member of the Democratic National Committee. Virtua
Re: (Score:3)
You're an idiot if you believe that. Who do you think is in charge of the TSA?
Re: (Score:3)
In the US it seems the lines can be wherever they want them to be at a time to guarantee you cross them.
Yeah, that can never happen in a dictatorship.
Re: (Score:3)
Death to Eastasia! Save our friends from Oceania!
Death to Oceania! Save our friends from Eastasia!
Even in dictatorships the leading class changes their mind. Be sure to change yours quicker.
Re: (Score:3)
There's a Rahinah Ibrahim and a Rahimah Ibrahim (well, there's at least one of each).
Which one are you talking about?
And is CCP Soviet Socialist Republics?
And wasn't Malaysia not a part of that?
Re:Southwest.. (Score:5, Insightful)
So then why do you think the federal government have the right to stop it? [wikipedia.org]
Just drive there (Score:4, Funny)
Flying is a privilege, not a right. She can just drive to court.
It's not like we don't have interstate highways in every state in the union [wikipedia.org].
Re:Just drive there (Score:5, Insightful)
If the jackboot fits, wear it.
Re:Just drive there (Score:5, Insightful)
Driving is a privilege, not a right. You can see where this leads...
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
She should have just WALKED to court.. duh!
Re: (Score:2)
Walking is a privilege, not a right.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Just drive there (Score:4, Insightful)
Freedom of movement is an important right we have. It's been infringed upon heavily in recent years.
What's next? Free speech zones?... oh.
Re:Just drive there (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just drive there (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll tell you what's a right: due process. The govt appears to be denying that to a witness in a trial for their own benefit. Let that sink in a sec and decide if the issue here is whether or not she can drive to court.
This,
Driving is not an inalienable or natural right, it's a privilege.
What the US govt did wrong was interfere with this persons "freedom of movement" as we call it in Australia which allows a citizen free and unfettered movement between all states and territories as well as the right to leave and re-enter the country at any time. The problem here is that:
1) The no-fly list does not just apply to air travel but also to other forms of travel. She was not simply denied flying, she was denied entry into the United States (as a US citizen as well).
2) The person in question purchased a legal ticket for travel, had all the required documentation and had committed no crimes or was even accused of committing a crime in either the destination or the origin of the flight.
This is completely different to holding a drivers license, which is a privilege that people abuse far too often.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes; she can hop on her submersible car and drive from MALAYSIA to SAN FRANCISCO.
Guys... chill! (Score:5, Funny)
Flying is a privilege, not a right. She can just drive to court.
It's not like we don't have interstate highways in every state in the union [wikipedia.org].
For those who hadn't noticed, I'm referring to an INTERstate road on an island, while also parodying a government legal rationalization and general ignorance of geography and logic by the US.
For those who still can't figure it out... yes, it's humor.
For those who did figure it out... check out all the people here who couldn't figure this out!
Re: (Score:2)
You can keep your flight plan, you can keep your insurance, you can leave your hat on.
Trust us.
Re: (Score:2)
Flying is a privilege, not a right. She can just drive to court.
It's not like we don't have interstate highways in every state in the union [wikipedia.org].
Maybe should could have driven there, or taken a bus/train, except she wasn't informed until she was trying to board the plane... lets say you had a court date in NY and were in Cali... you get told at the ticket counter you cant fly... think you will make it via driving/bus/train? And they lied about it, in court...
Re: (Score:2)
hard to drive to SFO from Malaysia.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, I got the parody, but the horrible thing is that I've seen the same sentiment for real. A major newspaper editorialized that people who didn't want to go through the TSA porn scanners could just take the bus or the train. The notion that there are places unreachable by bus or train completely escaped them.
Re:Just drive there (Score:4, Interesting)
I am astonished (Score:5, Funny)
I really have to congratulate you. Reading the long string of replies from idiots who didn't follow the link and/or get the joke is hilarious.
It's like I touched the third rail of the internet. I am astonished.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is even worse than that. Not just flying and driving are considered a privilege, even the things explicitly enumerated in the Constitution as rights are being treated as privileges. Gun-ownership is the most obvious example — even in the "gun-friendly" locales (like Texas), keeping and bearing requires a license. And even if the Executive branch "shall issue" such licenses, it can also withdraw (or not renew) them — without bothering with the Judiciary.
Heck, even "performing in costume" requ [nymag.com]
Re:Just drive there (Score:5, Insightful)
I know your comment was intended to be funny but I think this is serious issue; one our society and our courts have gotten wrong for a long time now.
One of our most basic enumerated rights is that of assembly. In order to assemble that requires being able to go to where the assembly is happening. The right to travel ( at least within the jurisdiction of the United States ) is strongly implied by the first Amendment to the Constitution.
As a practical matter in the modern world flying and even more so driving essential to travel. Having established the right to travel, I think it can and should be argued that flying and driving are in fact not privileges but rights. Rights which cannot and should not be denied anyone but upon conviction of crime.
Which means that lots of things like vehicle check points, and insurance requirements are on shake legal ground too.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, and a Federal Judge just ruled this way (that air travel is a constitutional right because it's the common means of travel). 9th Circuit, I think, then remanded to the lower court to proceed. Check the recent Democracy Now! segment on this case for details.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes. "Interstate" means the federal government pays for building and maintaining it. The name is a relic from the time people believed the constitution's commerce clause only applies to interstate commerce.
Re: (Score:2)
But the feds don't want to pay for bridges on the I5.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, "Interstate Highway" is shorthand for "The Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways". It's not just the commerce clause that was used to authorize it, but also the preamble which permits them to "provide for the common defense" -- it was initially a military network, almost entirely planned by General John J. Pershing.
Re:Just drive there (Score:5, Insightful)
Tuttle, Buttle, what's the difference? The Department of Records doesn't make mistakes!
(Dear NSA: I was going to self-censor, because I know that mentioning terrist organizations reflects poorly on my loyalty score. Let the record show that I'm making a reference to a movie called Brazil, in which... well, let's just say the next time someone streams it over Netflix, you should watch along with them. You'll find a lot that's familiar.)
Re: (Score:3)
this is agent 5443117 You have lost over 40 loyalty points in this month and are dangerously close to being selected for reeducation. Be careful or you may enjoy a visit from some friendly adjustment specalists.
Oh, your milk is going to spoil in 2 days, go buy a new gallon tonight.
Re: (Score:2)
Kind of hard to cross that big old ocean 'tween the U.S. and Malaysia...
IN A CAR!!!
You just have to get a kayak
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Just drive there (Score:4, Funny)
Wait for the Bearing Strait to freeze up, and you can make it.
Hey, it's spelled Bearing Straight!
Re: (Score:3)
Nope, it is spelled Bering Strait, named after Vitus Bering, a Danish-born Russian explorer.
I'm readying popcorn (Score:5, Informative)
No popcorn yet (Score:5, Informative)
Don't get out your popcorn just yet. From the article:
But Judge Alsup noted that the document with the DHS instructions to the airline was not supported by any sworn testimony or evidence of its authenticity. “You have to have a sworn record before I can do something dramatic.” Judge Alsup said he would consider the document if and when Ms. Mustafa Kamal arrives in San Francisco and can testify as to its authenticity.
Ms. Pipkin said that Ms. Mustafa Kamal was reluctant to spend the money on another airline ticket to San Francisco without some assurance that this time she would be allowed to board her flight.
“Get her on an airplane and get her here,” Judge Alsup responded. “She’s a U.S. citizen. She doesn’t need a visa. I’m not going to believe that she can’t get on a plane until she tries again. ” And Mr Freeborne, with disingenuous faux-solicitude, claimed that the government is “willing to do whatever we can to facilitate” Ms. Mustafa Kamal’s ability to board a flight to the U.S.
Re: (Score:3)
Um, isn't this kind of the point of a No-Fly list? It doesn't matter if you are a US Citizen, if you're on the list you don't get to fly. The alternatives are either finding a boat or chartering a private flight I think. I suspect that she will be able to board the
Re:No popcorn yet (Score:5, Informative)
He's saying that he doesn't believe the contention that she is on the no-fly list. The government denies that she's on a no-fly list. The document that claims she was comes from an airline, not from the DHS itself, so it's possible that the reason she was denied boarding comes from further down the line.
She's reluctant to try again, since the flight isn't cheap (and they didn't refund her money). The airline is blaming DHS, and that's the part I'm not sure how they'd go about proving. They'd need to prove that the order they claim came from the DHS actually came from the DHS. I don't know what channel the message was delivered to them, so I don't know how they'd authenticate it, and the fact that DHS usually operates in secrecy makes it that much harder.
If I read it correctly, she doesn't have to try again, she simply needs to get Malaysia Airlines to cough up their source for the document they provided. I've got no idea how easy that would be.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's illegal for the airlines to disclose if someone is on the no fly list, let alone why. And depending on the airline DHS might not even tell them why they are denying them. That's the biggest injustice of the whole thing. You can't know if you are on it, you can't challenge being on it and no one in the airline industry is allowed to assist you in any way.
The judge likely doesn't believe it because he's not aware of how unjust the no-fly lists are and like most American's he's naive enough to believe tha
Re:No popcorn yet (Score:4, Insightful)
What I would like to know is how its legal for the airline to not refund her money. She paid for a ticket to SF, attempted to board the airplane, and was told to fuck off. I'd be on the line with my credit card company getting that charged back in a heartbeat.
Re:No popcorn yet (Score:5, Insightful)
How can she prove she is on the list when the airlines are instructed not to let the passenger know the reason why the passenger is denied boarding...
Re:No popcorn yet (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a fucking secret. If they tell her then it's not a secret! This is why we have secret lists, so we can get around the Constitution which inhibits us from doing what we want to do. We can't keep people safe from the bad guys if we have to follow the Constitution.
Re:No popcorn yet (Score:5, Insightful)
>How can she prove she is on the list when the airlines are instructed not to let the passenger know the reason why the passenger is denied boarding...
Malaysian Airlines actually provided her a copy of the letter from the DHS.
The judge, though, said that it's not a sworn statement, so it has no validity. You know, the letter that was used to block her from travelling. That one.
Fucking unbelievable.
Re: (Score:2)
Did the airline refund her the price of the ticket and all associated transportation costs (hotel, etc?) No? Nice. If she paid for the ticket, and she's on a no-fly list, who reimburses her for the services not rendered?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No popcorn yet (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:No popcorn yet (Score:5, Insightful)
"You have to have a sworn record before I can do something dramatic." Judge Alsup said he would consider the document if and when Ms. Mustafa Kamal arrives in San Francisco and can testify as to its authenticity.
FTFNFLA: [wikipedia.org]
A "false positive" occurs when a passenger who is not on the No Fly List has a name that matches or is similar to a name on the list. False positive passengers will not be allowed to board a flight unless they can differentiate themselves from the actual person on the list, usually by presenting ID showing their middle name or date of birth. In some cases, false positive passengers have been denied boarding or have missed flights because they could not easily prove that they were not the person on the No Fly List.
When an airline ticket is purchased, the reservation system uses software to compare the passenger's name against the No Fly List. If the name matches, or is similar to a name on the No Fly List, a restriction is placed in their reservation that prevents them from being issued a boarding pass until the airline has determined whether or not they are the actual person whose name is on the No Fly List.
In order for a citizen to comply with the laws it is essential that they be allowed to know the laws that apply to them. A restriction on flying, driving or status as a prisoner under arrest must be public information available to the citizens that such rules affect. The citizens can not protect themselves from secret rules they know nothing about. The system should have notified her at purchase that she was subject to a law which could require her facing additional government scrutiny. Judge Alsup should subpoena the no fly list as of the time Kamal purchased the airline ticket, and fucking check it himself -- He can write a Java range check program, so he can Ctrl+F a partial name match, or even look at the matching algorithm in use and see the evidence for himself.
IMO, he is right in desiring a sworn testimony of the wronged party before taking action on their behalf -- A higher court may throw out such actions without at least a party claiming damage. However, the government is NOT allowed to withhold evidence. The no-fly list is evidence. They're not allowed to tamper with witnesses either. The list may no longer contain her name, but it very well may have. If the witness can not get on the plane to fly to court then how in the flying fuck can they give their sworn testimony? The court wants the witness, they should pay the fucking air fare -- at least give a voucher redeemable for an equivalent to their mile-high club. The government created the damn problem in the first place, they're the ones who should have a taste of their own invasive inspection medicine.
In other words: If citizens should be assumed innocent until proven guilty -- The laws themselves should be assumed guilty until proven innocent.
Re:No popcorn yet (Score:5, Insightful)
Alsup is simply being careful as he should be. Not being careful opens doors for appeals which he seeks to avoid.
Re: (Score:3)
You are. He is actually stacking the odds against the prosecution by challenging (daring really) not to block the witness from appearing. Also, once again, it does the defense and the witness no good if a final decision in their favor is overturned on appeal based on a trvial technicality. Better that the prosecution's case is destroyed with strong evidence of their own misconduct. And to do that, very strong proof must be presented. If she arrives safely and provides testimony, that's good. If she is
Re: (Score:3)
three times is enemy action (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, the NSA would never abuse all that personal data it's hovering up.
Re: (Score:3)
the NSA would never abuse all that personal data it's hovering up.
Or Hoovering up, even.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hoover_Company [wikipedia.org]
Re:three times is enemy action (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:three times is enemy action (Score:4, Informative)
Re:three times is enemy action (Score:5, Insightful)
U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Zoe vs. Williams (1982).
I'll add that, although it is not the law of the USA, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 13(2) is explicit: "Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country."
Re: (Score:3)
Well with each passing year it's become less and less of a privilege. Unfortunately, this would hardly be a precedent:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List#False_positives_and_other_controversial_cases [wikipedia.org]
And why don't you think a little before you start ranting? Think a bit, then rant.
Re:three times is enemy action (Score:5, Insightful)
Since abandoning the un declaration of human rights..... you know, about the same time they deemed it legal to shoot suspects(including americans) with missiles from the sky without extradition attempt.
Rule of Law (Score:4, Insightful)
We have all learned to our chagrin that this is what has become of the rule of law in our day and age. There is no law, there are no rules. The Constitution no longer applies. There is only rule by fiat. That's a very shaky basis for a society. It will not end well for those promulgating this state of affairs. There are hundreds of millions more of us than there are of them, and we are heavily armed and educated. Everything we need to track down and hang the 1%.
Chew and digest.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This sort of lawlessness and unaccountability is precisely what Michael Cannon testified to congress about. [infowars.com] He asserted that what this leads to no one wants to think about. But that by following this path to its conclusion can end no other way as in all of human history, no one has succeeded in that sort of domination and abuse..
If you asked me if this was possible 20 years ago, I would have said "Yes, and they have already done it. We have some freedoms, but no real control. We're happy and comfortable
What about the innocents? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I can't speak for any other potential freedom fighter, but I can speak for myself, so here are my answers:
(a) I will never target innocents, and will always make every reasonable effort to protect them from harm, including enemy reprisals.
(b) The blood flow stops when one side surrenders or everyone on it is deceased. It will likely be mine. We don't have the numbers to win, only to weaken the enemy and reduce its ability to rob, enslave and murder people, and to buy time for future generations of patriot
Moral of story: Big government too powerful (Score:4, Insightful)
As if we needed yet another reminder, this shows us in all sorts of ways how bad big government really is. Either they abused the list to keep a witness out, or they really COULDN'T tell she was on the list which means the list is an utter unmanageable clusterfuck.
Either way this is the result when government is allowed to grow too large and too powerful, abuse and mismanagement grow exponentially. Remember this come any election, always vote for the guy that wants to give you less, not more.
No one watches the watchers (Score:4, Interesting)
2 years ago ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Now I call it the new normal.
William Alsup for Supreme Court! (Score:3)
Very interesting implication (Score:5, Interesting)
Imagine this sequence of events:
1. A perfectly legal subpoena is issued for someone to appear as a witness, while they're a plane's flight away from home.
2. Put witness on no-fly list.
3. Cite witness for contempt of court for failing to appear.
Boom, you now have a tool for the intelligence community, with the help of a friendly (or blackmailed) judge to put anyone away they like, for any reason they like, at least for a little while. And sure, the contempt citation would eventually be reversed on appeal due to the obvious entrapment issue (the government caused the witness to fail to appear due to its own actions), but by then whoever was targeted has already had their life thoroughly screwed up.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah. No.
For example: Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(b) requires that you serve the person with the subpoena. If you wait until they're away from home, you're going to have a much harder time finding them. Not a complete barrier to the scheme, but ask your lawy
Re: (Score:3)
Slightly traumatic
You obviously have never spent any time in jail, and really obviously have never been in a non-US jail. And you've never followed an international extradition proceeding either, have you? Your "remarkably quick" proceeding rarely happens in less then two weeks, and if the arresting country has any issue at all with any recent US policy it can be stretched out for months.
Slightly traumatic my ass.
This is illegal, no? (Score:5, Insightful)
What are they teaching lawyers these days? That it's OK to commit perjury? Who wants to see the lying lawyers spend some time in jail? Raise your hand.
Dear Homeland Security Apparatus: (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Ah yes... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Ah yes... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The NY Times is not just a blog.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/07/us/07watch.html?pagewanted=all [nytimes.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Please provide a reference to your screed.
There is *NO* other evidence that this event took place *except* the blog post.
I can write a blog TODAY that says anything I want/
Re: (Score:3)
The only diffrence between now, and the 1970s, is that we don't even have a single shred of pretense of freedom left. No one is even going to bother with a new church commission.
Or we might have to wait for a powerful CIA/FBI figure like hover to expire, before they get lax enough to stop threatening senators to keep it quiet, because that is how Hoover stayed in power so long.
Re:Let's see what the judge says... (Score:5, Informative)
Alsop is the Judge. One of the few good ones left. He'll probably Fillet the DOJ and serve them up for lunch. Unfortunately, the DOJ will appeal when they don't get their way.
Re:Let's see what the judge says... (Score:5, Informative)
Question: Does the judge have the authority to command an army of paramilitary police with ACTUAL assault weapons and armored vehicles? The DoJ does.
Another question: Despite the courts ruling that the Washington DC ban on firearms was unconstitutional, the law continues to be enforced. What weight does a judge's ruling have any longer?
The government (the executive) follows the law when it's convenient. It breaks the law when the law is inconvenient. And no one is interested in countering it.
Re: (Score:3)
Another question. Can't the judge summarily rule against the government since they wouldn't allow the person to testify? Essentially they've denied a fair trial and he could just drop the hammer.
Re:Let's see what the judge says... (Score:5, Interesting)
Another question. Can't the judge summarily rule against the government since they wouldn't allow the person to testify? Essentially they've denied a fair trial and he could just drop the hammer.
It is a good thing I am not a member of the bar...
I think you are wondering if he can dismiss the case....
Yes he can.
I am wondering if he can dismiss the case with prejudice so it cannot be refiled.
I hope he can.
I am wondering if he can incarcerate the entire prosecution team
for contempt of court.
I hope he does if it is clear that they tampered with witnesses.
It is a federal crime to tamper with witnesses and conspiracy amplifies
the reach of the crime.
The recent revelation of a false conviction based on withheld evidence
by the prosecution makes me want to see 4x penalty. The man spent
25 some years in jail. Those that knew should be locked up for 100 years
and have their lives turned inside out. Abuse of power is difficult
to tolerate.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'll simply ask you to google "Adam Kokesh." He has been charged with violation of that ban. As a form of protest, he went into DC with a shotgun, turned on a video camera, loaded and made ready his weapon and then posted it on the internet.
Please learn and stop presuming. The NRA is a lobby group. They are still fighting that and many other laws. Lobbyists are most effective at preventing new law and helping to write new law. That's what lobbyists do.
Re: (Score:3)
Adam Kokesh, a controversial activist seen loading a gun in D.C.'s Freedom Plaza in a video posted to YouTube July 4, has been transferred from Fairfax County and charged in D.C. with openly carrying a shotgun in violation of D.C. laws.
He is specifically being charged with violating the following offense:
Carrying a Rifle or Shotgun (outside Home or Place of Business), in violati
Re: (Score:3)
Remember what happened the last time the Judicial Branch tried to tell the Executive Branch it couldn't do something? The Trail of Tears was the result.
Next time spend two seconds on Google before you start spewing such crap. You're off by a few orders of magnitude. The last time the Judicial branch told the Executive it couldn't do something was most certainly NOT the Trail of Tears. That was almost 200 years ago. Here's one case that was less than six months ago:
http://executivebranchproject.com/supreme-court-once-again-unanimously-rules-against-the-obama-administration-in-property-rights-case/ [executiveb...roject.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Anyone else getting really tired of the US Gov. in general? Wah wah at least it didn't happen to me... right?
Yes, but I'm even more afraid of the alternatives. As long as the people crying the loudest for its overthrow and/or dismantlement are the last people I want running things, I'm pretty much sticking with it.
I wonder if this is what it feels like to be an Egyptian. </bitterness>