Letters to the Editor
-
Re: Chilling Effect
It wouldn't surprise me at all if, post-9/11, the FBI has used its expanded authority to use techniques such as wire taps against suspected terrorists who aren't terrorists at all, and shoudn't even be suspects.
But this line of government creepiness just doesn't apply to the Briana Waters case. There is no evidence at all that she was pursued by the FBI because she was an activist. There is no evidence that the government obtained evidence against her that would have been illegally obtained were it not for the post-9/11 anti-terrorism laws.
Hyping this aspect of the story obscures a much larger problem with the criminal justice system. That is that prosecutors often willfully ignore exculpatory evidence, and do not share it with the defense. If they decide you are guilty, and have just a shred of evidence, they can find ways to put you in jail. They are, in fact, no different from the witnesses who falsely accuse others because if they name names, their own sentences are reduced: prosecutors' careers depend on putting people in jail, not on putting the RIGHT people in jail. Once it comes to light that an innocent person was convicted, it is an uphill battle for the wrongly convicted to demonstrate that the trial yielded an incorrect result. And the prosecutors are rarely, if ever, held accountable for their misdeeds.
Aside from the destroyed building and the ruined research it housed, the true tragedy of the Waters story is that she was probably a victim of shady practices that are all too common among US and district attorneys.
-
Jack Abramoff is a Terrorist
Based on the following statement in the article:
But the USA Patriot Act created a new category of domestic terrorism, which is defined as an offense "calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government"
Abramoff et al should have been tried on terrorism charges in and of the fact that the offense(bribery) was definitely intended to influence the conduct of government. This being the case, I suspect that K Street is crawling with terrorists.
Wherefore art though prosecution?
-
The State is in the hands of the Right ...
... the FBI is in the hands of the right-wing. The CIA is in the hands of the right. The local police are in the hands of the right. The BATF, the INS, the U.S. military, the ... are in the hands of the right.
No wonder they come down on the 'left' like a ton of bricks. Expect no mercy from them.
-
@Two letters: Pretty Lady and Sandy Yago
Beautifully said Pretty Lady:
Can you not see that a person may take action upon the dictates of conscience, and that conscience may not always dovetail with the law, and that fact is one of the most unique and precious virtues of humanity? Without conscience we would all be mindless automatons.
And from the automaton point of view we have Sandy Yago:
An activist is a person who wants to change something very specific in MY world whether I want it or not. That alone makes activists sort of unlikeable people, in whom arrogance and selfishness is combined with a single issue zealotry.
I am not against opening eyes, but eye-openers (iconoclasts, rebels, etc) want to change something in my world while persuading me to join in and want the change together with them.
Actually an activist wants to change something in "the" world although I'm pleased that you highlighted for us your egocentic view by capitalizing "my" while in the following sentence excoriating the activists for their "arrogance and selfishness".
That's as telling as your equating "thousands of years of selective breeding and hybridization" with genetic engineering done in the lab while condeming the activists "ignorance".
By the way, when has an activist asked you to "join in and want the change together with them"?
-
I'm confused
The fire took place in May, 2001. The Patriot Act was passed after September 11, 2001. So any change in the definition of terrorism in the Patriot Act is irrelevant to whether this act was terrorism. It's that whole "ex post facto law" thing.
So, is the article claiming that the Patriot Act really made a legal difference in this case? Or just that the overall tone of society has changed and the Justice Department takes this stuff more seriously now?
-
Terrorist acts = Criminal acts
The only purpose in proclaiming something to be a terrorist act instead of a criminal act is to inflame opinion. It doesn't matter who is doing the labeling, calling something terrorism is intended to increase the reaction against it. Terrorists call their actions terrorism because their motivation is to instill fear. Governments and prosecutions call actions terrorism because they want to instill fear as well, but where terrorists want to influence governments to change their actions or positions, governments want to use the same fear to increase control.
At their root, terrorist acts whether setting bombs or fires or flying planes into buildings are all criminal activities and should be treated as such. Terrorism is a motive, nothing more.
-
Ummm
"Briana Waters wouldn't seem to fit the profile of a dangerous terrorist . . . She has long, straw-colored hair and blue-gray eyes, and always seems to hold her shoulders forward, like a girl who is shy about being tallest in her sixth-grade class"
Oh my gosh, you mean blonde-haired, blue-eyed people commit crimes?
Sorry, remind me again what profile a terrorist should fit? Maybe the author feels she should have a turban or brown skin before we start to feel nerous . . . ?
-
ELF paranoia
A few facts, decide for yourselves if they are linked:
Back in 2003, I was the Executive Officer (paid administrator) of my local chapter of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB). In the summer of that year, I attended the national convention of my peers. We heard a presentation by a "terrorism expert" about the danger posed by ELF. The talk struck me at the time as another example of manufactured paranoia, plenty of which we had seen recently. ELF seemed to me to be not exactly a confederation but a flag that could be raised by any disaffected anti-development radical who chose to turn to arson. It's pretty easy to spray-paint ELF on the side of the structure you are about to burn.
In early 2004, the NAHB staged their annual International Builders Show in Las Vegas. The keynote speaker, and God only knows what he was paid for his uninspiring speech, was former President George H.W. Bush.
In January 2005, the NAHB was one of those generous donors that ponied up $250,000 to help fund George W. Bush's inaugural celebration.
Home builders of course are swayed by the prospect of having a nearly-finished building torched by arsonists. Luckily, they had Attorney General Ashcroft on their side, to bring the full weight of the Patriot Act to bear on the eco"terrorists". It clearly pays to be on the right side of this administration. Too bad there will be no more further chances to contribute to Bush inaugural galas.