10 Reasons America is No Longer the Land of the Free

I often note how foreign nations are outstripping the USA in terms of freedoms and civil equality for their citizens. And for LGBT Americans the lack of equality is something driven home virtually every day for those who have the misfortune to live in states like Virginia where official government policy makes us targets for open discrimination and reduced civil rights. Ironically, the U. S. State Department regularly issues reports on human rights practices and individual rights in other countries. It similarly monitors the passage of restrictive laws and regulations around the world. Unfortunately, the USA doesn't rate itself. But it should because we are falling behind in freedoms. In a Washington Post column, Johnathan Turley looks at ten ways in which America does not live up to its advertised promise of being the land of the free. Here are some column highlights:

In the decade since Sept. 11, 2001, this country has comprehensively reduced civil liberties in the name of an expanded security state. The most recent example of this was the National Defense Authorization Act, signed Dec. 31, which allows for the indefinite detention of citizens. At what point does the reduction of individual rights in our country change how we define ourselves?

Americans often proclaim our nation as a symbol of freedom to the world while dismissing nations such as Cuba and China as categorically unfree. Yet, objectively, we may be only half right. Those countries do lack basic individual rights such as due process, placing them outside any reasonable definition of “free,” but the United States now has much more in common with such regimes than anyone may like to admit.

These countries [Cuba and China] also have constitutions that purport to guarantee freedoms and rights. But their governments have broad discretion in denying those rights and few real avenues for challenges by citizens — precisely the problem with the new laws in this country. The list of powers acquired by the U.S. government since 9/11 puts us in rather troubling company.

1. ASSASSINATION OF U.S. CITIZENS. President Obama has claimed, as President George W. Bush did before him, the right to order the killing of any citizen considered a terrorist or an abettor of terrorism. . . . . (Nations such as Nigeria, Iran and Syria have been routinely criticized for extrajudicial killings of enemies of the state.)

2. INDEFINITE DETENTION. Under the law signed last month, terrorism suspects are to be held by the military; the president also has the authority to indefinitely detain citizens accused of terrorism. While the administration claims that this provision only codified existing law, experts widely contest this view, and the administration has opposed efforts to challenge such authority in federal courts. The government continues to claim the right to strip citizens of legal protections based on its sole discretion. (China recently codified a more limited detention law for its citizens, while countries such as Cambodia have been singled out by the United States for “prolonged detention.”)

3. ARBITRARY JUSTICE. The president now decides whether a person will receive a trial in the federal courts or in a military tribunal, a system that has been ridiculed around the world for lacking basic due process protections.

4. WARRANTLESS SEARCHES. The president may now order warrantless surveillance, including a new capability to force companies and organizations to turn over information on citizens’ finances, communications and associations. . . . The government can use “national security letters” to demand, without probable cause, that organizations turn over information on citizens — and order them not to reveal the disclosure to the affected party. (Saudi Arabia and Pakistan operate under laws that allow the government to engage in widespread discretionary surveillance.)

5. SECRET EVIDENCE. The government now routinely uses secret evidence to detain individuals and employs secret evidence in federal and military courts. It also forces the dismissal of cases against the United States by simply filing declarations that the cases would make the government reveal classified information that would harm national security.

6. WAR CRIMES. The world clamored for prosecutions of those responsible for waterboarding terrorism suspects during the Bush administration, but the Obama administration said in 2009 that it would not allow CIA employees to be investigated or prosecuted for such actions. This gutted not just treaty obligations but the Nuremberg principles of international law. When courts in countries such as Spain moved to investigate Bush officials for war crimes, the Obama administration reportedly urged foreign officials not to allow such cases to proceed, despite the fact that the United States has long claimed the same authority with regard to alleged war criminals in other countries.

7. SECRET COURT. The government has increased its use of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has expanded its secret warrants to include individuals deemed to be aiding or abetting hostile foreign governments or organizations. In 2011, Obama renewed these powers, including allowing secret searches of individuals who are not part of an identifiable terrorist group.

8. IMMUNITY FROM JUDICIAL REVIEW. Like the Bush administration, the Obama administration has successfully pushed for immunity for companies that assist in warrantless surveillance of citizens, blocking the ability of citizens to challenge the violation of privacy.

9. CONTINUAL MONITORING OF CITIZENS. The Obama administration has successfully defended its claim that it can use GPS devices to monitor every move of targeted citizens without securing any court order or review. (Saudi Arabia has installed massive public surveillance systems, while Cuba is notorious for active monitoring of selected citizens.)

10. EXTRAORDINARY RENDITIONS. The government now has the ability to transfer both citizens and non-citizens to another country under a system known as extraordinary rendition, which has been denounced as using other countries, such as Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Pakistan, to torture suspects. The Obama administration says it is not continuing the abuses of this practice under Bush, but it insists on the unfettered right to order such transfers — including the possible transfer of U.S. citizens.

An authoritarian nation is defined not just by the use of authoritarian powers, but by the ability to use them. If a president can take away your freedom or your life on his own authority, all rights become little more than a discretionary grant subject to executive will.

The framers lived under autocratic rule and understood this danger better than we do. James Madison famously warned that we needed a system that did not depend on the good intentions or motivations of our rulers: “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.”

Since 9/11, we have created the very government the framers feared: a government with sweeping and largely unchecked powers resting on the hope that they will be used wisely. . . . Dishonesty from politicians is nothing new for Americans. The real question is whether we are lying to ourselves when we call this country the land of the free.

Americans need to face the truth: our government now wields powers and has the power to trample on individual rights and freedoms reminiscent of what one would have seen in Tsarist Russia, Germany under the Nazis, Russia under Stalin, and in Communist China. It is beyond frightening what we have allowed to happen in the name of national security. It's the same excuse used over the centuries for justification of tyranny.

Georgia Arrainment Shows Danger of Far Right Domestic Terrorists

No one can forget the carnage that hit Norway when a far right wacko went on a bombing and shooting spree earlier this year. While those events were thousands of miles away, events in Georgia back in June indicate that similar far right terrorist threats are alive and well in America. Indeed, but for the FBI's success in arresting a group of would be terrorists, who knows what the death toll might have been. The proposed terror attackers (one is pictured at right) have been documented to have been regurgitating the usual extremist bile that passes for reasoned discourse in far right and all too many GOP circles. Atlanta and other major cities were intended targets as were federal officials. It is truly frightening just how deranged many on the far right have become. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution looks at the chilling plot that was fortunately derailed. Here are some highlights:

It was June 9, and Frederick Thomas believed he was meeting with a dealer in black market weapons at a Lavonia restaurant, according to FBI affidavits. . . . . Neither Thomas nor his colleague, 67-year-old Dan "Cobra" Roberts, knew the arms dealer was an undercover informant for the FBI.

A story grew clearer Wednesday through federal affidavits, interviews and court statements accusing Thomas, Roberts and two other men -- Ray H. Adams, 65, and Samuel J. Crump, 68 -- of planning to unleash the toxic agent ricin across Atlanta and other major U.S. cities, bomb federal buildings and take innocent lives. Documents say the men intended to launch their plot within a year.

It was a plan based on a novel by Mike Vanderboegh, a former militia leader and blogger, that detailed killing Justice Department attorneys, Thomas said, according to the FBI affidavits.

FBI documents allege that beginning in March and as recently as last week, the men -- whom federal officials have not identified as part of a larger militia -- met at their homes and North Georgia restaurants. Some had made trips to Atlanta federal buildings to conduct reconnaissance. The affidavits describe Thomas and Roberts as working to obtain explosive devices and silencers, while Adams and Crump seemed largely tasked with developing ricin, a toxin that can be fatal if inhaled or ingested, from easily obtained castor beans.

Documents allege that Crump planned to disperse the ricin in various U.S. cities including Atlanta, Newark, N.J., and Washington. In Atlanta, the documents said, the plan was to unleash the powdery substance on I-285, I-75 and U.S. 41.

These people are scary. What's even more scary is that there are many more of them out there being motivated by the hate speech of the far right (e.g., Rush Limbaugh) and the Christian Right.

Sexual Orientation Included in "Terrorist" Data; Death Panalty for Blogging

One has to wonder WYF is going on with the USA and EU countries moving towards an agreement to share data in what are supposedly criminal and terrorist cases. However, included in the data to potentially be shared is information on individuals' sexual orientation. While I know the Christianists would gladly categorize all LGBT individuals as some sort of terrorists, one would have thought the governments of modern democracies would be beyond such thinking. Not according to a Washington Post story. Meanwhile, in Iran, legislation may be coming that would establish a basis for arresting and/or executing bloggers for "establishing websites and weblogs promoting corruption, prostitution and apostasy." First some highlights from the WP story (note that the EU is more concerned about people's privacy than the Chimperator's minions):

*

The United States is negotiating deals with European countries to exchange fingerprint and DNA data in criminal and terrorist cases, and in some circumstances to transfer data on race or ethnic origin, political and religious beliefs, or sexual orientation. . . . Senior Bush administration officials said the data exchange is crucial for spotting dangerous people before they enter the United States and for furthering criminal and terrorist investigations.

*

But European privacy officials are concerned that the emerging bilateral pacts will not adequately protect people's privacy. And U.S. privacy advocates are concerned about the potential transfer of sensitive information on U.S. citizens to Europe. The bilateral pacts augment the airline passenger record agreement reached last year with the E.U., which requires airlines flying here from abroad to transfer data on passengers to U.S. security agencies. They also complement a series of bilateral agreements to exchange screening data on known or suspected terrorists, which exclude data on race, religious beliefs and other sensitive items.

*

But some European lawmakers fear that, taken together, the accords will lead to a far-reaching exchange of personal data without appropriate safeguards and that eventually the United States will seek access to Europe-wide databases. . . . But Schaar, who is independent from the government, said he found no "clear rules on purpose limitation" or on the storage period. "First," he said, "which data are of concern is not really completely clear. Second, who are the competent authorities on the U.S. side? Third, and most important, there is a lack of independent supervision in the United States over data protection." In European states, independent privacy commissions safeguard the privacy rights of citizens, he said.*

*

Switching to Iran, the way things are headed can only be viewed as a blueprint that Daddy Dobson and other Christo-fascists would love to emulate. That way yours truly and many other bloggers who discuss their inconvenient lies and efforts to subvert the U. S. Constitution could be dealt with. Here are some story highlights on this development:

*

On Wednesday, Iranian members of parliament voted to discuss a draft bill that seeks to “toughen punishment for disturbing mental security in society.” The text of the bill would add, “establishing websites and weblogs promoting corruption, prostitution and apostasy,” to the list of crimes punishable by death.

*

If the Iranian parliament approves this draft bill, bloggers fear they could be legally executed as criminals. No one has defined what it means to “disturb mental security in society”. Such discussion concerning blogs has not been unique to Iran. It shows that many authorities do not only wish to filter blogs, but also to eliminate bloggers!

*

Nikahang, a leading Iranian online cartoonist and blogger, says [Fa]: if this draft bill becomes law, everything will be based on interpretation and a simple blogger will be considered a center to destroy people’s religion! What can I say? Only people who disturb people’s mental security could support such a thing.

*

Fundamentalist religion - whether Islamic or Christian - continues to show itself as a principal enemy of democracy, personal liberty, and modernity. Would that more Americans would wake up to the evil that the James Dobsons and Don Wildmons of the nation and world represent.