← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · PaleoconAvatar
Thread ID: 3743 | Posts: 9 | Started: 2002-11-29
2002-11-29 00:01 | User Profile
[url=http://www2.kval.com/x30530.xml?ParentPageID=x2649&ContentID=x31525&Layout=kval.xsl&AdGroupID=x30530]The Eugene City Council Passes a Resolution Opposing the USA Patriot Act[/url]
November 25, 2002
By Jodi Unruh
New Anti-Terrorism Law Allows Police to Search Homes without a Warrant.
Downtown Eugene -
The Eugene City Council passed a resolution Monday night opposing the USA Patriot Act. Congress passed the legislation shortly after September 11th in hopes of cracking down on terrorism.
Eugene Councilors agreed to pass a resolution after listening to dozens speak out on the controversial anti-terrorism law during a public forum at the Eugene City Hall. Alexander Gonzales said, "If we grow up thinking that it's ok to profile, it's ok to subject people to searches, then what is ok?" Dawn Peebles said, "Now, ordinary citizens are fearful that the government can come into their homes without honoring the Bill of Rights."
Almost 2000 people had signed a petition asking the Eugene City Council to pass the Lane County Bill of Rights Defense Committee's Proposed Resolution. The document asks the US Attorney's Office and all federal, state, and local law enforcement officials to report to the City of Eugene the extent and manner in which they act under the new law. For instance, the resolution asks police to report the names and charges of any people being detained under the law, and to disclose the extent that federal authorities are monitoring political and religious gatherings in Eugene.
The new Eugene resolution is more symbolic than anything because officials don't have to comply with it. The document also asks Oregon Congressmen to try and revoke the law. 14 other local governments have passed similar resolutions.
Glad to see some people understand that the Constitution should mean something. However, our "Safety First" friends over at FR are angry at Eugene, Oregon; they seem to feel that concerns about Constitutional rights is just another aspect of the famed liberalism of the Northwest.
One of them posted [url=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/797182/posts?page=12#12]this suggestion:[/url]
**To: Dallas
The entire West Coast is filled with folks who think there is no war, and that there never was a war, and there is no need to increase vigilence, ferret out the bad people, and get on with our lives AFTER the war is won.
These people in Eugene are typical of the problem. They are also very insulting to those of us whose families and friends were put at risk by the skyjackers and their little buddies on the ground.
So, what is their problem - something in the water? Or, could it be they are a bunch of dope-headed slackers?
Whatever their problem, they should get over it and decide if they are part of the United States or part of AlQaida, and if part of AlQaida be prepared to be driven into the sea, lock, stock and barrel, men, women and children. Shoot them down in the surf if they try to get back.
12 posted on 11/28/2002 6:42 PM EST by muawiyah [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ] **
The poster seems to have fallen prey to the idea that "after the war is won" (can it be won?) the government will gladly give up the new powers it has gained. Additionally, I violent remarks were verboten at FR. Must only apply to those who don't support Bush's imperial plans.
2002-11-29 12:55 | User Profile
PaleoconAvatar,
Saw this report this morning. While resolutions from City Councils have only a symbolic presence, it does allow representatives to go on the recod.
This poster, muawiyah, reminds me of the "love it or leave it crowd" during the 60's. Our response always was - "change it or loose it".
The only war that is being waged is the one upon the American People, by their own government.
Maybe the Eugene folks need to get their Congress and Senate office holders to either endose or condemn this resolution.
We are entering the next stage of this charade. Time to draw clear lines between the real Patriots and the sheeple is long overdue.
Just like the NeoCons, the brain dead flag wavers are worshiping a false master.
SARTRE :ph34r:
2002-11-29 20:36 | User Profile
Neo-cons are such a moronic lot. They think that if you dont buy their ridiculously simplistic and illogical brand of conservatism then you must be a liberal. You are spot on SATRE, it is the 'love it or leave it' line of thinking. Is that what they would tell the revolutionaries of 1776?
I dont know how many times I've been called a liberal, and not a classical one either. GOP conservatism is like DEM liberalism, safe for ages 2-4.
2002-11-29 21:01 | User Profile
Originally posted by amundsen@Nov 29 2002, 16:36 **Neo-cons are such a moronic lot. They think that if you dont buy their ridiculously simplistic and illogical brand of conservatism then you must be a liberal. You are spot on SATRE, it is the 'love it or leave it' line of thinking. Is that what they would tell the revolutionaries of 1776?
I dont know how many times I've been called a liberal, and not a classical one either. GOP conservatism is like DEM liberalism, safe for ages 2-4.**
amundsen,
I get that all the time, too, from Freeper types. They accuse me of being a liberal, and I always tell their kind (when I have the chance and am not censored) that the liberals will be shocked to discover that I'm counted among them.
I've seen them accuse Pat Buchanan of the same thing; they say, "Oh, yeah, he was a good conservative in his day, but lately he's too much of a liberal." These neocons seem unable to conceive that there actually exist critics to their right. Every time they encounter a critic to their right, they automatically tie it back in to the Left. An example of their logic: "What? David Duke? He's just like Jesse Jackson."
I guess the neocon political compass is scrambled by Rush Limbaugh's strange magnetic waves.
2002-11-29 21:05 | User Profile
This poster, muawiyah, reminds me of the "love it or leave it crowd" during the 60's. Our response always was - "change it or loose it".
SARTRE,
I learn something new every day. I'd never encountered a response to the "love it or leave it" tag. Thanks for filling in the rest of the blanks.
2002-12-03 07:18 | User Profile
[url=http://www.wcax.com/global/story.asp?s=1032124&ClientType=Printable]Patriot Act Stirs Opposition In Burlington[/url]
Burlington, Vermont -- November 30, 2002
Congress passed the Patriot Act to give the government greater power to hunt down terrorists. But critics say it targets law-abiding Americans. Now the debate has landed in Burlington, where the city council is scheduled to vote on a resolution urging at least partial repeal of the act.
The problem, according to the critics, is that a trip to your local public library could conceivably put you under surveillance by the government -- as a potential terrorist. Among other changes to existing law, the Patriot Act allows the FBI and other government agencies to monitor the books you read and the Internet web sites you visit, not only at the library but from any computer. Moreover, Librarians are prohibited from talking about any visits they may get from the government.
"The Vermont library association is very concerned about this act," Trina Magi, past President of the Vermont Library Association, told Channel 3. "We think that if you have to start wondering what your reading list might look like to an FBI agent then you might just start to censor yourself and not read the things that you want to read. And the moment you have to begin thinking about that, you are no longer free to be an informed citizen."
The resolution's co-sponsor is Magi's husband, Progressive city councilor Doug Dunbebin (Ward 3). He said, "I think there needs to be a proper balance between personal safety and personal privacy."
Dunbebin points to more than a dozen cities around the country that have passed similar resolutions, most recently Eugene, Oregon. He said libraries are only part of the concern. "Additionally, what it does (the Patriot Act) is allow the federal government to conduct secret searches in peoples' homes. It also allows the federal government to monitor -- increase their ability to monitor -- telephone communications as well as Internet activity, and it also gives the federal government access to personal records such as education, the library records, health records, medical records."
Patriot Act supporters say government access to traditionally private personal records still require a judge's approval, although the process is secret under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
The local board that oversees the Fletcher Free Library already voted in favor of the same resolution that goes to the city council Monday night. But not everyone agrees that the Patriot Act is a relevant local issue.
Republican city councilor Kevin Curley (Ward 4) dismissed the resolution as a product of the city's dominant faction. "You know, this is just more typical Progressive politics," he said. "You play on peoples' fears and emotions."
Curley called the threat to civil liberties overblown. "The truth of the matter," he said, "is that how many people are really going to be looked into? Probably some people with some just cause. And what's the percentage of folks that have just cause to be looked at? I would think in the city of Burlington that's such a minute number, and maybe it's warranted for the minute number that's there."
Librarians, already on record against what they fear amounts to an assault on personal liberty, will follow the debate as the Patriot Act comes under scrutiny on the local level. The city council meets Monday Dec. 2 at 7:00pm at Contois auditorium in city hall.
Andy Potter, Channel 3 News
2002-12-03 19:32 | User Profile
PaleoconAvatar,
Alex Jones radio program just had a segment on the Vermont library association. The gale librarian would not anwser if the Feds had actually made a visit. She fears that part in the Patriot Act which prohibits anyone from telling about such intrusions. AJ said - there you have it!
SARTRE :ph34r:
2002-12-04 17:52 | User Profile
Originally posted by SARTRE@Dec 3 2002, 15:32 **PaleoconAvatar,
Alex Jones radio program just had a segment on the Vermont library association. The gale librarian would not anwser if the Feds had actually made a visit. She fears that part in the Patriot Act which prohibits anyone from telling about such intrusions. AJ said - there you have it!
SARTRE :ph34r:**
SARTRE:
I occasionally listen to the A. Jones program, but didn't catch that one.
I'm amazed that so many Americans worried about "terrorism" who are willing to give away their liberty in exchange for a fleeting security (like the FReepers) are so damn blind as to what's going on. I mean, think about it: who really believes that al-Qaeda terrorists are going to go to the library to check out books about bombs? If they're here engaging in operations in the U.S., then they're obviously well-trained already for the job. They're not learning "on the job" and certainly not out of library books they check out in English in-country. The real reason for this library monitoring business is to track domestic dissent for political reasons. Sometimes I really just can't believe how f---in' stupid some people are. And don't get me started on the "It's okay, I'm not a terrorist or extremist and I have nothing to hide" crowd! :lol:
2002-12-04 17:56 | User Profile
[url=http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=21034]City aldermen affirm civil liberties of residents[/url]
BY BRENDAN KEARNEY Contributing Reporter
The New Haven Board of Aldermen passed a resolution Monday reaffirming the civil rights and liberties granted city residents under the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution.
Crafted by the New Haven Peace Commission in response to the USA Patriot Act, the resolution cites the specific amendments of the U.S. Constitution that the commission deemed potentially imperiled by the federal act passed in October of 2001.
The resolution, which passed with only one dissenting vote, also pledged that "to the extent legally possible, no City employee or department shall officially assist or voluntarily cooperate with investigations, interrogations, or arrest procedures" that would breach these rights.
"I think we should reacquaint ourselves with these issues," said Ward 16 Alderman Raul Avila, chairman of the board's Human Services Committee, which passed the resolution to the full board.
"The powers [Congress] gave were vague and too poorly determined," said Avila of the anti-terrorism measures in the act that have been criticized by the American Civil Liberties Union among other civil rights organizations. "They had the potential to be abused."
The Patriot Act, subtitled "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act," allows for increased wire-tapping capabilities for intelligence agencies, more restrictive immigration practices, and greater authority for policing units to act without government supervision.
Ward 23 Alderman Yusuf Shah supported the resolution vociferously, claiming that he was unreasonably delayed during an airport visit because of his Muslim name.
"We say 'no' to 'suspicious'," he said. "We have to stand up for our civil rights. We fought too hard to have them."
Ward 11 Alderman Walter Wells urged constant vigilance, reminding his younger peers of the civil rights infringements of the era of McCarthyism.
"We survived all that, but we didn't all survive all that," said Wells. "I think we should give a great deal of thought to this kind of thing."
While expressing his support of the resolution, Ward 10 Alderman Edward Mattison expressed concern that the board has devoted too much time to national issues in recent months. The board passed a resolution in October condemning any potential unilateral military action against Iraq.
"I am concerned about whether at a certain point we will pass too many resolutions having to do with national political life," said Mattison, warning they might "lose their force."
Ward 18 Alderwoman Arlene DePino cast the lone vote in opposition, arguing that the threat of terror warrants even unprecedentedly drastic means.
"[The terrorists] used our freedom to kill our people, to try to destroy our economy, to change our way of life," she said. "And they continue to do so."
The Human Services Committee held a public hearing on the matter on Oct. 10, inviting the state's delegation to Washington, D.C., to attend and comment on the resolution. Although every senator and representative had voted for the Patriot Act last year, none attended the hearing.
The full board passed over the resolution twice, awaiting a response from the Connecticut members of Congress, but voted on Monday at the urging of the Peace Commission.
"We didn't want to support [the resolution] carte blanche without their input," Avila said, adding that he would appreciate a comment from the members of Congress.
The resolution will be sent to city and state departments as well as U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and U.S. President George W. Bush.