Ebrahim and Baloch were both arrested and held without charges in a high security cell block of a federal lockup in New york. They were held for eight months and then deported without charges. Neither had any apparent connection to terrorism. Ebrahim had an expired visa, Baloch is a Canadian doctor of Pakastaini birth.
Ebrahim and Baloch are currently involved in a lawsuit against the prison, the FBI and against John Ashcroft. While the justice department itself has found that the allegations have merit they are asking that the lawsuit be dismissed because Ashcroft and the other defendants are protected by immunity laws.
This is fucking scary shit, man. People are being rounded up and imprisoned simply on the basis of their race and religion. They’re being held without charges, without access to attorney or to family, and they’re being harrassed and abused while they’re in these federal cans. All the feds have to do is say the magic words “suspected terrorist” and the public automatically supports everything that Ashcroft and his fucking brownshirts want to do. After all, we all know that a “suspected” terrorist is exactly the same fucking thing as a “proven” terrorist, don’t we? And we can’t take any chances with those Arabs. It would be a huge threat to national security to actually have to prove in public that these guys did anything wrong. And if they get smacked around a little bit by the guards, well hey, that’s just payback for 9/11.
Why is so much of America so fucking sanguine about Ashcroft’s fucking gestappo tactics? Eli Wiesel wrote about the indifferent “faces in the windows” who watched passively as the rights of Jews were gradually eroded away, as they were herded into ghettos, and then as they were taken away to the death camps. Wiesel wrote that his hatred of those indifferent faces was even greater than his hatred for the nazis who put him in the camps and murdered his family. Enthusiastic support of the masses is not required for evil to succeed. Simple indifference is quite sufficient.
That whole constitution thing? The right to due process and freedom from “cruel and unusual punishment”? That applies to citizens of the US. These guys, they weren’t US citizens. They’re not “us” they’re THEM.
Ashcroft is doing his best to get “Nacht und Nebel” laws written so that he will have carte blanche to haul away anyone he pleases. Today it’s Arabs, tomorrow it’s protesters, and then it will be anyone who speaks out against the government’s tactics.
I swear that if a state of martial law were declared and Bush were made president for life, most Americans wouldn’t care as long as their regular TV shows weren’t interrupted. Hell, the majority of Americans are so apathetic that they don’t even bother to vote, so they wouldn’t miss not being able to.
Here of course is the Constitutional problem. The language of the Great Document is:
Amendment V. No person shall be…deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law….
Amendment XIV. …[N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. [for comparison]
You would think that with an administration pledged to a strict reading of the basic charter and to the avoidance of creative interpretation of its provisions the language of the Fifth Amendment would act as a bright-line limitation on the power of the federal government to conduct secret proceedings, hold people without charges and generally ignore the established principles of Due Process. For reasons I do not fully understand a gloss has been added to the language so that in effect it reads:
“No person, except persons who are not citizens of the United States or lawful immigrants into the United States, or persons who are within the power of the United States but outside the several States or the possessions and territories of the United States, shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. Those other people are fair game.”
It seems to me that something is seriously and fundamentally wrong here.
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Mtgman if you were just kidding, then consider me one among the whooshed. I’m going to respond as though you weren’k kidding. :dubious: If, indeed you were kidding, then please take the trouble to put in some indication of this next time. It certainly did not carry through to me this time.
All right Mtgman or should I say McCarthy? You seem to be trying to resurrect a Grand old American past time! I hope you fail miserably, but it’s accounts from the OP that make me certain that the tradition never died, it just went dormant.
How long before they come for you and I? They will, mark my words. Because we can think, and see the ugliness of their actions. If this is allowed to go on unchecked our rights will be trammled too.
I’ll leave you with a passage from the McCarthy era, it’s from an infamous trial of the time. You can read the full account here.
What’s all this fuss they’re making about them guys?
Darned if some people ain’t kickin’ because they got
What was comin’ to ‘em;
Sayin’, be Jesus,
It’s cause they’re reds.
That’s bad enough,
But that ain’t all —
Not by a damn sight.
Why, man alive,
They’re only a couple o’ God damn dagoes!..
Now me: I’m an American, I am …
Send 'em up, say I,
Show 'em that our courts is American.
We don’t get our law from Italy.
We don’t care whether they done it or not.
To hell with 'em!
They’re dagoes.
—Jim Seymour, 1921
Thus the preamble of my post. Consider my first post in this thread to be directed at those who actually do think like this. (Like Ashcroft and Bush) People like that do exist, as proven by the OP.
Gah! A guy can’t even be sarcastic anymore! Do you know how it feels to have to explain every joke? To include disclaimers?
It’s almost as annoying as that whole “truth in advertising” and “full disclosure” crapola they’re trying to shove down our throats when we’re writing ad campaigns for used car dealerships. If a car has been stolen five times, it’s still just “one owner” damnit!
I maintain that some indication needs to be included for those of us who don’t “know” you. This is a print medium and intent can not be conveyed without effort. I can’t see your face as you “say” those words, I have no way of knowing if you are kidding or not because I don’t “know” you.
There really are people who think like that, I’ve had the misfortune to interact with them in person. shudder
This is why it came as no suprise to me that someone actually (now known to be untrue) thought like that, and was willing to post that opinion here. I don’t shrug my shoulders and say “He must be kidding.” when I see posts like that because I’ve had encounters with such ugliness in person.
Very interesting cite. Not one direct quote from the originating Federal Report nor link to it.
If a poster threw this crap up,they’d be flamed into oblivion but Since it’s The Washington Post it’s gotta be the absolute and unabridged truth.
Hmmm, I would venture that the Washington Post got it’s information from the lawsuits filed, which cite a Government report. I’d like to read this report for myself as well. Not that I have any trouble believing that such things happened in the first place.
Is that the best you can do? The Washington Post is just making stuff up? How thick is the layer of denial that it takes to make yourself believe that?
I’ve had encounters with nasty sorts online too. The thing I’ve learned is it’s best to ask twice for clarification before you start flinging flames. If you think there is even a slight possibility of it being a joke, a misunderstanding, or any of a number of disconnects, then put the flames on the back burner and ask.
No biggie though. I wasn’t offended. Just seems now you’ve wasted a perfectly good flame. Sorry about that. I’ll probably still post jokes in the future without identifying them as such. Just FYI.
I’ll go on to state, my encounters with such people were face to face, not in the relative safety and anonimity of the net. I’ve looked into the eyes of such people, and heard the sentiments spoken aloud.
/Hijack Bosda Di’Chi of Tricor Get a clue you say? I’d say I have one already. I’ve already made a decent contribution to this thread according to one other poster, I made a “good analogy”. You on the other hand have not made any contribution to this thread beyond one sneering sentence and an emoticon.
Why don’t you get a clue? Don’t you have something better to do, like start a thread whining about how you are discriminated against because you wear all black? :dubious: I wear all black too, almost every day. (I had to wear an ivory and gold formal gown recently.)
I’m not going to start a whiny thread about how my rights are trammled because someone was intimidated by this, because even if that was the SOLE reason, it’s not worth my time to get all worked up about. They’re dumb and not worth my time and energy. :rolleyes: right back at you.
Hijack/
IOW, our irrational, racist panic gives us the right to supend all human rights for people that don’t look right or worship Jesus like they’re s’posed to.
