Category: Civil Rights

The Myth of Christian Founding Fathers

Well, religious nutbag Mike Huckabee claimed that most of the signers of the declaration of were clergy, which means that according according to Republican math, 1 out of 56 equals most. John Witherspoon* was the only active clergymen. The right wing Heritage Foundation claims that there were two signers who were former clergymen, and Adherents.com said four signers of the declaration were current or former full-time preachers.

George Washington was probably a deist, who refused communion. All indications are that he was more involved with Masonic theology (God as creator and now not involved on a day to day basis with the world). He rarely if ever, referred to Jesus.

John Adams became a Unitarian, rejecting fundamental doctrines of conventional Christianity, such as the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus

In his, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America” [1787-1788], John Adams wrote:

“The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.

“. . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.”

Jefferson believed in materialism, reason, and science. He never admitted to any religion but his own. In a letter to Ezra Stiles Ely, 25 June 1819, he wrote, “You say you are a Calvinist. I am not. I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know.”

James Madison found established religion pernicious.

In 1785, Madison wrote in his Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments:

“During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.”

“What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not.”

Then there is the treaty of Tripoli, ratified in 1979

As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”

What is clear is that however spiritual the founding fathers were, they were disdainful of organized religion, considering it to be ignorant superstition.

*Who is an ancestor of the delectable Reese Witherspoon.
An archaic term referring to Moslems.

More Political Prosecutions

This time, it involves Dr. Cyryl Wecht, the former Allegheny County Coroner, and former Attorney General, Pennsylvania Governor and former senate candidate, and staunch Republican Dick Thornburgh has testified before congress about this prosecution.

Thornburgh is one of Wecht’s defense lawyers, and his complaints stem from what he’s called the “sheer intensity” of the investigation, which involves relatively minor accusations that Thornburgh says should have been handled by the state ethics commission.

As a means of showing the relative triviality of the charges (the 84-count indictment doesn’t put a price tag on Wecht’s fraud), Wecht’s lawyers have calculated that the cumulative cost for the 37 charges in the indictment that involve improperly charging the county for gasoline and mileage costs add up to $1,778.55. The most colorful of the charges, of course, involve the elaborate body snatching scheme: prosecutors allege that Wecht gave a local Catholic university unclaimed bodies in exchange for laboratory space.

The source of the investigation’s “intensity” is U.S. Attorney for Pittsburgh Mary Beth Buchanan, a member of the DoJ’s inner circle who played a role in the U.S. attorney firings. It’s not the first time that Buchanan has drawn fire. During the heat of the scandal, a former assistant U.S. attorney in the district (from 1995-2000, before Buchanan took over) publicly called on Buchanan to resign because of “the extent to which she has looked to Washington for direction and political advancement.” Or to put it in plainer terms: Buchanan has prosecuted a number of Democrats but no Republicans.

There is also a history of not particularly veiled threats toward the defense attorneys.

Seriously, once Bush and His Evil Minions are out of office, we are going to have to deBushify our government in the way that we deNazified the German one after WW II.

Bush has polluted everything he has ever touched in his life.

Well Knock Me Over With a Halibut, Steny Hoyer Stands Up Against Telco Immunity

I’m pleasantly surprised, as he tends to be one of the guys who goes along, though his district is quite safe, butyesterday, he gave a very strong speech against Bush’s Telco immunity.

“Finally, this legislation is silent on the issue of retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that possibly violated privacy laws in turning over consumer information – because Congress does not have full access to information about what the companies did.

“Simply stated, it would be grossly irresponsible for Congress to grant blanket immunity for companies without even knowing whether their conduct was legal or not. And, importantly, this view is shared by the Chairman and Ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Until we understand what legal authorities were used to justify the terrorist surveillance program, there does not appear to be any practicable way to include retroactive immunity in this bill.”

As always, with all Democrats, I hope that he sticks to his guns.

Obama Clarifies, He is Against ANY Telco Immunity

After Senator Chris Dodd announced his intention to filibuster any bill with Telco immunity, Senators Clinton and Obama announced that they support a filibuster of THE BILL that came from the Senate intelligence committee.

These are, of course, weasel words. It has to go through some more committees, Judiciary comes to mind, and it is inconceivable that it would do so without so much as a comma changed, so they were free to support the final product.

While Clinton has not clarified, Obama has now made it clear that
he will support a filibuster of ANY bill with telco immunity.

The by Bill Burton, the Obama Campaign’s spokesman:

“To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.”

Biden is on board too, but Hillary is still using weasel words?

Chris Dodd Is Now Number 2 On My Dem Candidates List

As you are no doubt aware, the Senate caved to Bush and His Evil Minions™ on indemnifying the telcos.

The Honorable Christopher Dodd (D-CT) has put a hold on the bill.

As I have said before, this amnesty is about covering up the fact that Bush used the telcos to spy on his political opponents.

Any Senator in the race who does not do all they can to strike this provision (yes, that means signing on to a filibuster) will not get my vote for President, that means you, Clinton, Biden, and Obama.

For Senator Obama it means showing up for the votes and taking a stand. I know that you are running for president, but it seems that you are dodging these votes.

As to why Dodd is #2 on my list, behind Edwards, while is he is great on non-economic interests, I think that he is not as good on non-economic issues, particularly those dealing with Wall Street, though considering that 1/3 of Wall Street lives in Southern Connecticut, I’m not surprised.

White House to Give Senate Intel Committee SOME Surveillance Program Documents

Well, it appears that the White House willgive the Senate Intelligence Committee SOME documents from their surveillance program. It appears that the Democrats saying that there would be no retroactive surveillance got Bush and His Evil Minions to back down.

The question is why such a paranoid and secrecy obsessed group of people would cave over the possibility of some telephone companies being in legal jeopardy.

The only conclusion is that Bush and his people are concerned that the telcos will cut a deal, with disclosure of what they did, and who they targeted, and that this would do profound damage to Bush.

Let’s connect the dots:

  • Former Qwest CEO Joe Nacchio said that he was asked to participate in this surveillance program on February 27, 2001, almost 7 months before 911.
  • The Bush Administration was largely unconcerned about terrorism prior to 911, Condi Rice going as far as saying that the real area of concern would be a resurgent Russia asserting itself on the world stage*.
  • We have the 911 commission report confirming that the political appointees in the Bush Admin were unconcerned with terrorism.
  • We have a large number of former Bush administration officials, starting with John Dilulio, who have said that there was no policy apparatus in the whitehouse, just a political one, and that all decisions were made on the basis of political expediency.

So there is no reason for such a program except for a surveillance fetish, and spying on political enemies.

Misusing the state security apparatus for this purpose is an impeachable offence, period, full stop.

*Nice to know that your work as head of the NSC and as Secretary of State has prevented that. Heck of a job there Condi.

Illegal NSA Wiretapping Began Before September 11

I missed the bigger story on my last post on this, because I did not pay enough attention to the time line, but this is BIG. The NSA illegal wiretapping was not a part of “post 911 thinking”, because it was not post 911!!!!

Simply put, this program was being put in place in February of 2001, this was about a month after Bush entered office, and when by all available evidence, Bush and His Evil Minions
had no concern with, nor even an inkling about the nature of the terrorist threat.

They were looking at Saddam, or at a resurgent Russia (Cheney-Rumsfeld the former, Condi the latter). As such, they had no reason for expanded wiretap powers.

[former Qwest CEO Joe] Nacchio’s account, which places the NSA proposal at a meeting on Feb. 27, 2001, suggests that the Bush administration was seeking to enlist telecommunications firms in programs without court oversight before the terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon. The Sept. 11 attacks have been cited by the government as the main impetus for its warrantless surveillance efforts.

There are only two possible reasons for this:

  • A mindless pro-surveillance mindset in the administration combined with an opportunistic bureaucracy in the state security apparatus.
  • A desire to engage in surveillance on political opponents.

My guess would be that it was a little bit of both. These are seriously bad people.

All White Jury

That is all you need to hear to understand why seven boot camp guards and one nurse at the Bay County boot camp were acquitted following the videotaped beating and death of Martin Lee Anderson, a 14 year old black child.

An autopsy found he had a previously undiagnosed blood disorder. The defense argued that is what caused his death. The all-white jury agreed.

The “blood disorder” in question is Sickle Cell trait. This means that he carried one Sickle Cell Anemia gene. The effect of this condition is much like carrying one gene for Cystic Fibrosis: there are no significant effects. (Being heterozygous for Sickle Cell will increase resistance to Malaria and decrease oxygen carrying capacity by much less than 1%, and being heterozygous for CF protects against Diphtheria). The Air Force does not consider Sickle cell trait to be a reson to exclude someone from being a pilot, for example.

“You kill a dog, you go to jail,” Crump said on the courtroom steps just after the verdict was delivered. “You kill a little black boy, nothing happens.”

Welcome to Bay County, Florida.

Democrats to Cave to Bush on Illegal Wiretaps

It looks like Bush will be getting what he wants on the wiretap bill. All reports are that the Democrats are caving.

It looks like telco indemnification is in, as is broad warrants that allow the state security apparatus to listen in to American conversations as long as the Americans are not specifically targeted.

The biggest knock that Republicans have on Democrats is that they have no guts, and now, the reports that “Many members continue to fear that if they don’t support whatever the president asks for, they’ll be perceived as soft on terrorism,” from a national security expert won’t help that.

The Democrats were elected to stop Bush, and they should realize that, particularly in this case, it’s the right thing to stop Bush, and it is to their political advantage.

The can do the right thing, and benefit politically. All they need is some guts.

Cowards.

This is Our Future Dystopia

Larry Magid, of Siliconvalley.com, had a dystopian vision a couple of weeks ago, September 26 to be specific.

Two things happened that day:

  • Verizon refused to allow the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) to send out alerts to people who had requested them, because the content was deemed to be, “controversial or unsavory”. (They later reversed themselves)
  • Pudding Media demonstrated an ad supported VOIP system, where voice recognition is used to provide ads that are appropriate to the conversation’s context.

His vision, and one that I also fear, is one where the wireless carriers, using voice recognition, choose to allow only those communications that they choose over their networks.

When it comes to the two events of Sept. 26, I worry about the misuse of technology similar to what Pudding Media is using. Not only would it be easy to provide transcripts of our calls to authorities, but all calls could be parsed in real time. Say the wrong thing and your call could be interrupted or you could get an immediate visit from some guys with guns in a big sport-utility vehicle.

Such a scenario would not be in the interest of phone companies, and it certainly wouldn’t be tolerated by civil-liberties minded Americans. But based on what I’ve seen since 9/11, I have no doubt some in government and the private sector would love to see this happen.

The mere thought of it is creepy.

It’s more than creepy. It is very, very likely. It’s like some vision of George Orwell or William Gibson, and it’s closer than most of us would like to think.

Even more than its use to arrest dissenters, is its use by folks like Bush and His Evil Minions&trade to blackmail political opponents. It’s Karl Rove’s wet dream, and it’s Verizon’s wet dream too, because they can use the tech to become the advertising conduit for everything.

If property rights for private operators trump civil rights for people, we are already 90% of the way there.

I’d scream, but I have laryngitis (really…chest cold).

Progressive Caucus Stops Hoyer From Gutting Bill of Rights

Steny Hoyer had a press conference scheduled today, where he was to roll out the Democratic reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

It’s been postponed because the 70 member progressive caucus pushed back.

Of note, the Hoyer was saying that his piece of crap legislation had to go forward to protect the Congressional freshman, but these same freshmen were saying that the voters sent them to DC specifically to oppose stuff like this.

Here is the progressive caucus statement of principles:

Progressive Caucus Official Position and Fundamental Principles Governing FISA Reform, as adopted

October 3, 2007

We, Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, fully recognizing we live in a dangerous world but proud of, and deeply committed to, the values that have made the United States an exemplar for the world, affirm the following principles to guide consideration over the debate regarding surveillance of foreign intelligence. We hold that these principles represent the pillars by which America gives no quarter to terrorists who would do our country harm, while at the same time ensuring fidelity to the distinctively American commitment to the rule of law, the dignity of the individual, and separation of powers.

1. It should be the policy of the United States that the objective of any authorized program of foreign intelligence surveillance must be to ensure that American citizens and persons in America are secure in their persons, papers, and effects, but makes terrorists throughout the world feel insecure.

2. The best way to achieve these twin goals is to follow the rule of law. And the exclusive law to follow with respect to authorizing foreign surveillance gathering on U.S. soil is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). As initially enacted by Congress, the exclusivity of FISA was unambiguous. Legislation must reiterate current law that FISA is the exclusive means to authorize foreign surveillance gathering on U.S. soil.

3. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) should be modernized to accommodate new technologies and to make clear that foreign to foreign communications are not subject to the FISA, even though modern technology enables that communication to be routed through the United States.

4. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) is indispensable and must play a meaningful role in ensuring compliance with the law. This oversight should include, where possible, regular judicial approval and review of surveillance, of whose communications will be collected, of how it will be gathered, and of how content and other data in communications to and from the United States will be handled.

5. Congress must have regular access to information about how many U.S. communications are being collected and the authority to require court orders when it becomes clear that a certain program or surveillance of a target is scooping up communications of U.S. persons.

6. Once the government has reason to believe that a specific account, person or facility will have contact with someone in the United States, the government should be required to return to the FISC to obtain a court order for continued surveillance. Reliance on the FISC will help ensure the privacy of U.S. persons’ communications.

7. Congress should not grant amnesty to any telecommunications company or to any other entity or individual for helping the NSA spy illegally on innocent Americans. The availability of amnesty will have the unintended consequence of encouraging telecommunications companies to comply with, rather than contest, illegal requests to spy on Americans.

8. Authorization to conduct foreign surveillance gathering on U.S. soil must never be made permanent. The threats to America’s security and the liberties of its people will change over time and require constant vigilance by the people’s representatives in Congress.

Senate Passes Hate Crimes Bill and Welds it to the Defense Authorization Bill

So there won’t be a veto of the hate crimes bill. Sexual orientation is now mentioned.

All of the Democrats, the one Socialist (Sanders), and the one “Connecticut for Lieberman” senators voted Aye, as did nine Republicans:

  • John Warner (VA)
  • Richard Lugar (IN)
  • Susan Collins (ME)
  • Olympia Snowe (ME)
  • George Voinovich (OH)
  • Arlen Specter (PA)
  • Norm Coleman (MN)
  • Judd Gregg (NH)
  • Gordon Smith (OR)

This meant that it was a veto proof majority, 60 votes. Vitter and Craig voted no.

I’m pleasantly surprised at Gregg and Voinovich.

Good News on the Civil Liberties Front

U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero Ruled parts of Patriot Act unconstitutional, specifically the national security letters, which allow the state security apparatus to demand “business data” without a judicial review, and prevent those served from discussing this, even with their lawyers.

U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero said the government orders must be subject to meaningful judicial review and that the recently rewritten Patriot Act “offends the fundamental constitutional principles of checks and balances and separation of powers.”

….

The law was written “reflects an attempt by Congress and the executive to infringe upon the judiciary’s designated role under the Constitution,” Marrero wrote.

One wonders how long before the Bush dogs come up with another version of these star chamber orders.

Good News: The Constitution Applies to Gays Too

Oklahoma has a lay which forbids recognition of gay adoptions. The federal court of appeals struck down down the law. It violates the U.S. Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit Clause, which requires states to honor one another’s judicial judgments, including adoptions.

Good news. The law was mean spirited, Un-American, and probably got the full endorsement of both the Taliban and Al-Queida.