We need cookies... Don't eat ze bugs.
Executive Order--Order of Succession Within the Department of Justice
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, 5 U.S.C. 3345 et seq., it is hereby ordered that: Section 1. Order of Succession. Subject to the provisions of section 2 of this order, the following officers, in the order listed, shall act as and perform the functions and duties of the office of Attorney General, during any period in which the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, and any officers designated by the Attorney General pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 508 to act as Attorney General have died, resigned, or otherwise become unable to perform the functions and duties of the office of Attorney General, until such time as at least one of the officers mentioned above is able to perform the functions and duties of that office: (a) United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia; (b) United States Attorney for the District of Minnesota; and (c) United States Attorney for the District of Arizona. Sec. 2. Exceptions. (a) No individual who is serving in an office listed in section 1 of this order in an acting capacity, by virtue of so serving, shall act as Attorney General pursuant to this order. (b) No individual listed in section 1 shall act as Attorney General unless that individual is otherwise eligible to so serve under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998. (c) Notwithstanding the provisions of this order, the President retains discretion, to the extent permitted by law, to depart from this order in designating an acting Attorney General. Sec. 3. Executive Order 13481 of December 9, 2008, is revoked. Sec. 4. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity, by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. BARACK OBAMA THE WHITE HOUSE, November 4, 2010.
0 Comments
Feeling lonely and craving human touch? Book a flight and go through airport security. The TSA screeners have a new enhanced pat down which has been likened to "foreplay." What's that? You don't want to be fondled for TSA's new aggressive and controversial body searches? TSA is counting on that, counting on you to instead choose for airport screeners to see a picture of the intimate contours of your naked body via the scanners. The aggressively enhanced TSA pat down involves over-the-clothes searches of passengers' breast and genital areas. You can opt not to go through the backscatter body scanners, and thereby keep your genitalia private from pictures, but then a TSA screener will use a front-of-the-hand, slide-down body screening that Ars Technica called "nut-busting pat-downs."
The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg asked a TSA screener, "In other words, people, when faced with a choice, will inevitably choose the Dick-Measuring Device over molestation? " The TSA screener replied, "That's what we're hoping for. We're trying to get everyone into the machine." Goldberg pointed out the fact that a terrorist would hide weapons inside their body and then asked if the new TSA guidelines included a cavity search. The TSA screeners said, "No way. You think Congress would allow that?" These new TSA security theater search tactics have raised privacy issues with civil liberties advocates. The TSA tried similar aggressive pat down searches in 2004, but backed down when the ACLU began investigating. In 2009, issues with TSA and virtual strip searches via body scanners had the ACLU quoting Slate, "Show us your body, or we'll feel you up." That seems more true today with the TSA's new rub down searches. In a recent post called TSA pat-down search abuse, the ACLU asked people to share more information about how these TSA searches are being conducted. There is a form to file a complaint with the ACLU, "If you are denied the right to opt out of the body scanner machines or believe you have suffered from rough, rude, and humiliating manhandling and groping of breasts and crotch areas, sexual comments, and a lack of privacy." TSA's Blogger Bob wrote, "Passengers may receive a pat-down in a number of circumstances: to resolve an alarm at a walk-through metal detector; if an anomaly is detected during screening with advanced imaging technology; or during random screening. Passengers who opt out of enhanced screening such as advanced imaging technology will receive an equivalent level of screening to include a thorough pat-down. Remember, you can always request to be screened in a private area." Christopher Elliott reported that TSA said, "TSA takes passenger privacy very seriously and builds privacy protections into its security procedures." If a stranger feels you up at the airport, how is that invasion taking your privacy seriously? I'm not proposing that TSA workers enjoy subjecting people to enhanced rub downs, but surely the public outcry is only going to get much worse. In comments, some say they will not send their children through x-ray body scanners and will press charges if a screener "molests" their child. The Savvy Traveler wrote that the new TSA pat down "would be sexual assault anywhere else." After her underwire bra set off an alarm, CNN's Rosemary Fitzpatrick was reduced to tears when subjected to a pat down. She said, "I felt helpless, I felt violated, and I felt humiliated." People on certain medications or who carry certain toiletries might trigger "groping." People who have a pacemaker, or who had hip or knee replacement, as well as those who are wheelchair bound and cannot go through the body scanners will be put through an "abusive pat-down complete with hands to the crotch." Consumer Traveler summed it up as, "According to executives with whom I discussed these various pat-downs, training was too difficult for a selection of pat-downs, so the decision was made to treat everyone like a common criminal suspected of carrying a hidden snub-nosed pistol or secreting drugs or explosives. " ACLU spokesperson Christopher Ott told Homeland Security Today, "We're all for good effective security measures. But, in general, we're concerned about this seemingly constant erosion of privacy, and we wonder whether or not it's really going to be effective. None of us want terrorists on a plane, but surely terrorists would conceal explosive devices or weapons inside body cavities which would not be detected by the enhanced TSA pat down. A year ago, Slate pointed out that TSA promised the enhanced pat-down would "affect a very small percentage of travelers." To which the Slate writer said, "Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's what you said about the body scans. Just put on the gloves and get it over with." That may seem like a sick joke, but so did body scanners at one point. Let's see if we can stop this madness before it escalates further. If you feel humiliated, manhandled, sexually assaulted, or suffered a lack of privacy after "TSA search abuse," then make sure you at least file a complaint with the ACLU. Link: http://bit.ly/a0gaLj Billings, Montana — 31-year-old Ryan Bain of Billings, Montana went into cardiac arrest and died while being held at the Yellowstone County Detention Facility after police shocked him multiple times with a Taser gun.
It happened Sunday night just after 11:00 PM. Yellowstone County Sheriff's Deputy John Smith was off-duty while driving on 13th Street West near Avenue E when he noticed a naked man running through a neighborhood. Smith notified the police department and assisting officers were sent. Police said the suspect entered a house not believed to be his own before he stole Deputy Smith's 1992 Chevy van. Officers tased Bain multiple times - twice in the back and once on the leg - in an effort to subdue him. The officers then put their tasers in drive-stun mode, a less intense shock. Officers finally subdued Bain, but when they arrived at the detention facility, he began to fight officers. He was then tased a fourth time and placed in a restraint chair. Medical personnel checked Bain, but shortly after being placed in a holding cell the suspect went into cardiac arrest. The suspect was taken to St. Vincent Healthcare and according to a press release was listed in critical condition, but a caller who identified himself as a family member informed KULR-8 Tuesday evening that Bain had died. Officers said the suspect appeared to be under the influence and they had no choice but to try and apprehend him. As with any "use of force" case, whether a suspect is hurt or not, police will investigate what happened to determine if their actions were appropriate. Panama City Beach- The Florida Department of Law Enforcement is investigating the death of a local man who died while Bay County Sheriff's deputies were trying to arrest him. The death of 23-year-old Andrew Grande is devastating for his friends and family. But it was also traumatic for the deputies and the camera crew riding along with them as the responded to a disturbance call early Friday morning.
Just after 2AM Friday deputies responded to a disturbance call at the Executive Inn on front beach road. They say Grande pushed a female friend. A camera crew from Zoo Productions filmed what happened when deputies arrived. When one of the deputies tried to arrest him they say he resisted and stuffed something in his mouth. That's when at least one of the deputies shot him with a taser. They say he pulled the taser probes out of his body, that's when deputies noticed he was choking. A privacy watchdog has uncovered a government memo that encourages federal agents to befriend people on a variety of social networks, to take advantage of their readiness to share -- and to spy on them. In response to a Freedom of Information request, the government released a handful of documents, including a May 2008 memo detailing how social-networking sites are exploited by the Office of Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS).
As of Thursday morning, Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, and Digg had not commented on the report, which details the official government program to spy via social networking. Other websites the government is spying on include Twitter, MySpace, Craigslist and Wikipedia, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which filed the FOIA request. "Narcissistic tendencies in many people fuel a need to have a large group of 'friends' link to their pages, and many of these people accept cyber-friends that they don't even know," stated one of the documents obtained by the EFF. "This provides an excellent vantage point for FDNS to observe the daily life of beneficiaries and petitioners who are suspected of fraudulent activities," it said. According to the EFF, this memo -- which specifically details how the government evaluates potential citizen requests -- suggests there's nothing to prevent an exaggerated, harmless or even out-of-date offhand comment in a status update from quickly becoming the subject of a full investigation. With this revelation, the government joins a growing list of groups using social-networking sites for purposes other than social networking. As these sites have gained popularity, scammers and spammers have become rampant, and hackers are increasingly turning to networks such as Facebook to spread viruses and Trojan Horses. The EFF also uncovered efforts by the Department of Homeland Security to monitor social media during the inauguration of President Obama. According to the documents, the DHS collected a massive amount of data on individuals and organizations explicitly tied to the event. The DHS notably attempted to ensure that its use of social networks was appropriate while gathering data online. The newly released documents cite the Fair Information Practices Principles, a 2008 policy memo by the Department of Homeland Security's chief privacy officer that set guidelines for ensuring online privacy during the collection of information. Another government agency, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, denies using social networks to spy on people. "USCIS does not permit agency personnel to attempt to 'friend' immigration petitioners and their beneficiaries on social networks in an effort to reveal fraud." Still, the EFF worries that the DHS may be taking things too far. "While it is laudable to see DHS discussing the Fair Information Practice Principles as part of the design for such a project, the breadth of sites targeted is concerning," the watchdog group wrote on its website. Among the networks specifically cited for analysis "were general social networking sites like Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and Flickr, as well as sites that focus specifically on certain demographic groups such as MiGente and BlackPlanet, news sites such as NPR, and political commentary sites DailyKos," the EFF wrote. For more information, read the full report at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. by: Yana Kunichoff, t r u t h o u t | Report On the heels of a series of FBI raids on anti-war activists, an FBI whistleblower and constitutional rights groups are calling out the agency for overstepping its bounds, fearing that its increased powers could infringe on First Amendment rights and silence dissent. Agents searched the homes of anti-war activists in Chicago, Minneapolis, Michigan and Durham, North Carolina in the last two weeks of September, along with the offices of the Minnesota Anti-War Committee, confiscating computers, cell phones, large amounts of paper and financial records, according to the activists and their attorneys. "The FBI raids seem to reflect the latest actions by a recidivist agency that has lost sight of its mission to protect public safety," Shahid Buttar, executive director of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee and the People's Campaign for the Constitution told Truthout. According to the subpoenas, the activists, who were involved in labor causes, the anti-war movement and the Arab American Action Network, are being investigated for contact they may have had with members of Hezbollah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). The spokesman for the FBI in Minneapolis said, "the warrants are seeking evidence in support of an ongoing Joint Terrorism Task Force investigation into activities concerning the material support of terrorism." All the individuals involved in the raids denied their connections to terrorist organizations, and said any meetings or contact they may have had with the groups were perfectly legal. Jess Sundin, of the Minnesota Anti-War Committee, noted that when she met FARC rebels in Colombia in 2000, the Colombian government was holding peace talks with the rebels at a public forum, where she met them. Sundin said she has had no contact with FARC since. The FBI has come under attack recently from a string of reports and investigations that showcase an unfair targeting of activists. Just days before the raids of activists in the Midwest and North Carolina, the Department of Justice released a report finding that between 2001 and 2006, the FBI kept tabs on activists affiliated with Greenpeace, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta), Catholic Workers and Quakers. According to the report, the agency improperly placed these individuals on terrorist watch lists, and gave inaccurate and misleading information to Congress and the public about its activities. "The Bureau's standard for undercover activities is known neither by the public nor Congress," Buttar wrote in an op-ed in Truthout earlier this year. "Intelligence agencies may justifiably pursue clandestine activities, but should not operate according to secret rules - at least not in countries that claim to lead the free world." The FBI disclosed part of its policy following a Freedom of Information Act request made by Buttar, but the section on undercover infiltration has remained secret. A two-year Washington Post investigation, "Top Secret America," detailed the extent of domestic spying and found that the web it wove was so widespread it had become entirely unwieldy: "The top-secret world the government created in response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has become so large, so unwieldy and so secretive that no one knows how much money it costs, how many people it employs, how many programs exist within it or exactly how many agencies do the same work." James R. Clapper, then undersecretary of defense for intelligence and now director of national intelligence, told the investigators in June 2010, "There's only one entity in the entire universe that has visibility on all SAPs [Special Access Programs] - that's God." Colleen Rowley, a former FBI agent and whistleblower, told Truthout it was "breathtaking to recognize the irony" of the raids on individuals involved in left-leaning, domestic, advocacy groups only days after the flurry of criticism against the agency's mode of operation. Rowley, who left the FBI in 2004 after 24 years with the agency, said the blunders were part of a wider change in FBI rules and the ways it evaluates success. Quantitative rather than qualitative evaluation now means that individual agents are under increased pressure to meet targets, Rowley said, which is evidenced by recent reports of FBI cheating on internal tests. On September 27, 2010, an internal FBI investigation found widespreadcheating on a test related to Bush-era guidelines on justification needed to target a domestic group. The investigators "found test-taking conduct that constituted cheating and abuse, such as the use of answer sheets when taking the exam," which Rowley considers further justification of the response: "Oh my gosh, how can they be continuing after this!" The 2001 Patriot Act loosened restrictions on domestic information gathering by law enforcement agencies, but even these powers have been exploited by the FBI, notes Buttar - three separate reports in 2007, 2008 and 2010 document abuse of the powers extended by President George W. Bush after the attacks on 9/11. Both Buttar and Rowley said that the erosion of FBI constraints reached a new level in 2008 - the Mukasey Guidelines, meant to provide consolidated standards for agents to follow, effectively switched the presumption of one of proving guilt to proving innocence. FBI Director Robert Mueller testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee that FBI agents could not exercise surveillance in the absence of "suspicion," but later amended his statement in a note to Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Illinois). In his note, according to The Associated Press, Mueller said that the FBI "must have a proper purpose before conducting surveillance, but suspicion of wrongdoing is not required." Much of the FBI's abuses have been painted as overhangs of the Bush era, but Rowley notes that current president Barack Obama is a constitutional lawyer, and a Supreme Court case that she calls "the most recent nail in the coffin" was put through under the Obama administration. The legal prohibitions in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project make it a crime to provide support, including humanitarian aid, literature distribution and political advocacy, to any groups that the United States government has designated as a "terrorist" group. The 12-year case, a challenge to the material support statute, was concluded this summer with the Supreme Court voting 6-to-3 that the statute's prohibitions on expert advice, training, service and personnel were not vague and did not violate speech rights. But Buttar, Rowley and William Quigley, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, said the loose definition of "material support" could criminalize political speech and humanitarian aid, and by extension, the right to free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment. Quigley noted that the raids on anti-war activists "would have been thought totally ridiculous before the Supreme Court case." "It is still ridiculous, but now also ominous. Whether this is a policy decision by the Department of Justice and the Obama administration or whether this is just a few over-zealous FBI agents we don't know yet," Quigley continued, "but unfortunately the people who are targeted are going to be the guinea pigs for the rest of us to find this out." At a grand jury hearing held Tuesday in Chicago, the activists who had their homes raided refused to testify and assist the government investigation of their activities. For Rowley, the focus of the raids on individuals who have been involved with anti-war movements indicates an extreme illogic in American national security policy - "the mentality to believe that if you are against the war on terror that somehow makes you a terrorist." The raids on the homes of activists "did signal that the war on terror," Rowley said, "has now been turned inward on domestic advocacy groups." by: Nadia Prupis, t r u t h o u t | Report
Two reports published by NYU's Brennan Center for Justice and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) reveal a rising trend of patently unconstitutional practices in cash-strapped states, where a growing number of impoverished people are jailed for being unable to pay their legal fees - including charges for use of public defenders, a guaranteed right in the United States. The resurgence of these draconian "debtors' prisons" has been documented in at least 13 of the 15 states with the largest prison populations in the country, including California, Arizona, Michigan and Alabama. "Incarcerating people simply because they cannot afford to pay their legal debts is not only unconstitutional but also has a devastating impact upon men and women whose only crime is that they are poor," said ACLU senior staff attorney Eric Balaban. Many states view the fees as a method for helping to alleviate budget deficits. In New Orleans, Louisiana, legal fines comprise almost two-thirds of criminal courts' operating budgets. But the ACLU found in its report, "In for a Penny: The Rise of America's New Debtors' Prisons," that jailing individuals for failing to pay legal fees actually places the financial burden on the state, wasting taxpayer money and resources to keep those individuals in jail or on public welfare as they struggle to pay their overwhelming debts. Moreover, these and other penalties creates obstacles for those re-entering society after completing their criminal sentence; the Brennan Center report, "Criminal Justice Debt: A Barrier to Reentry," notes that eight of the 15 states studied suspend driving privileges of individuals who miss debt payments, while seven states require them to complete their full payments before regaining eligibility to vote. Such unnecessary setbacks often pave the way for those on probation to return to jail through no fault of their own. "We are undermining the integrity of our criminal justice system and creating a two-tiered system of justice in which the poorest among us are punished more harshly than those with means, at a great cost to taxpayers," said ACLU deputy legal director Vanita Gupta. Imprisoning probationers for failing to pay court debts was found unconstitutional in 1980, when Georgia resident Danny Bearden was sent to prison for two years when he could not pay $550 in legal fees, despite his efforts. In Bearden v. Georgia, the Supreme Court ruled that such practices violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment - but states throughout the country have begun openly disregarding these principles in their efforts to balance their budgets. The ACLU report highlights a few exemplary cases. Gregory White, a homeless man in Louisiana, was arrested for stealing $39 worth of food from a grocery store and assigned $339 in legal fees; when he was jailed for being unable to pay, White spent 198 days in jail at a cost of $3,5000 to the city. Georgia resident Ora Lee Hurley owed $705 in fines from a 1990 drug possession conviction and remained in jail for eight months for failing to pay. Kawana Young, a 25-year-old single mother in Michigan, was told after the fact that her community service hours would not satisfy her debts because she had volunteered with a nonprofit organization. Young has since been jailed five times for being unable to pay her fees. And Percy Dear, a New Orleans resident who suffers from epilepsy, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, was arrested for begging in 2007. After pleading guilty, Dear was sentenced with either paying an immediate fine of $200 or spending 20 days in jail. Dear was unable to pay his fine at once and was incarcerated. These particular "fine or time" sentences are a glaring example of methods that plainly punish indigent cases while allowing wealthy individuals to go free on the same charges. Judge Calvin Johnson, who served for 17 years in the Criminal District Court or Orleans Parish, said that regularly sentencing defendants in a "fine or time" method could have cost the city more than it collected. "30 days or $100 - that was something I heard every day," said Johnson in the ACLU report. "Now, how can you describe a system where the city pays $23 a day to the Sheriff to house someone in jail for 30 days to collect $100 as anything other than crazy?" "People are emerging from the criminal justice process with significant debts that they cannot hope to repay," said Brennan Center Deputy Director Rebekah Diller. "As a result, these fees are creating new paths back to prison for those unable to pay." Former Montgomery County, Ohio, public defender Glen H. Dewar is profiled in the ACLU report for his efforts in eliminating the state's debtors' prisons. Dewar stated in the report, "My estimate is that 20 to 25 percent of all local incarcerations statewide are for fines and costs, while about 50 percent of arrests are for fines and costs ... [until 2000], none of the persons arrested for nonpayment of fines and costs appeared on any court docket. Nor were they ever scheduled to appear at any particular time before any particular judge or magistrate." Before county jail records were computerized, Dewar said, "the scope of the problem, in terms of both numbers of arrests and days in jail, remained hidden ... the county also expanded jail space at a cost of millions, unaware of the fact that it was not for criminals but debtors." As noted in the Brennan Center report, several states have also started to utilize practices that violate the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees defendants a right to counsel. Florida, North Carolina and Virginia have all implemented mandatory defender fees and provide no opportunity to waive them for indigent cases. According to the report, "defender fees often discourage individuals from exercising their constitutional right to an attorney - leading to wrongful convictions, over-incarceration and significant burdens on the operation of courts. In Michigan, for example, the National Legal Aid and Defender Association found that the threat of paying the full cost of assigned counsel resulted in misdemeanor defendants systematically waiving their right to counsel - at a rate of 95 percent in one county." In Virginia, defendants often face up to $1,235 per count for some felonies. The Brennan Center recommends that states eliminate public defender fees and offer community service programs that build job skills, among other state and local policy reforms; the ACLU similarly recommends that a judicial assessment of a convicted defendant's ability to pay fines must be comprehensive. Government Agents Seize Oath Keeper's New Born From Hospital Concord Hospital, NH, Wed. Oct. 7th, 2010 Last Night John Irish & Stephanie Janvrin had their new born baby girl taken away by government officials because of their involvement with Oath Keepers, a non violent constitutional organization. According to Irish, The Director of Security and the Head Nurse of the Hospital said "we want the pediatrician to check the baby in the nursery so that you can go home." The baby was wheeled out in the bassinet under the protest of Irish. Irish followed them out and took note of 3-4 men wearing suits with detective badges as well as 3 police officers. The Division of Family Child Services proceeded to pat down John and inform the parents they would be taking the daughter. "They Stole our Child" says John Irish. An Affidavit was produced that claimed an affiliation with a militia called Oath Keepers. Irish claims Oath Keepers is a non violent organization. John and Stephanie were able to spend a few minutes with their daughter and were forced to leave. A security officer escorted the two out of the hospital. George Hemminger george4title(AT)yahoo.com BornPatriot 6 minutes ago Part I Watchman Noyes I have a copy of the affidavit and I can tell you that it says verbatim these words "The Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as "Oath Keepers", and had purchased several different types of weap...ons including a rifle, handgun and a taser." (none of which is illegal, and anyone who has ever been to oathkeepers website knows that they are not a "militia". Comments From the Father (Found on Oath Keepers Site): Alright everyone, I apologize that I never singed up on the new site. I never had 5 free minutes to, my fiancee had a rough pregnancy to say the least so I had to drop from the ranks. Yes, Stewart has the documents that I had faxed to him and no it is not mis-information. Celia, I know you are only hearing "one side" but you are hearing the TRUTH, there entire affidavit is nothing but false claims with not back bone or evidence what so ever. They have fabricated lies upon fabricated lies, the only evidence they have is what comes out of there mouth, they have nothing to provide to substantiate they ridiculous hollow claims I honestly don't understand how the hell the did this my head is still spinning, it feels like I am in a VERY bad dream that won't end. Thank you all for your support, I need to get in with her. She hasn't stopped balling her eyes out for about 12 hours now. Comment by Johnathon Irish — October 7, 2010 @ 10:58 pm I am going to rack out because my fiancee and I are over exhausted with all of this. If any of you think this is a "scam" or something of the sort watch Alex Jones tomorrow I think he has me on at 12 noon. People will know then, my daughter was stolen the only scam going on here is the one that the State of NH is pulling. Comment by Johnathon Irish — October 7, 2010 @ 11:10 pm Original Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvZRM-P46rI&feature=player_embedded by Vicky Pelaez
HUMAN rights organizations, as well as political and social ones, are condemning what they are calling a new form of inhumane exploitation in the United States, where they say a prison population of up to 2 million - mostly Black and Hispanic - are working for various industries for a pittance. For the tycoons who have invested in the prison industry, it has been like finding a pot of gold. They don't have to worry about strikes or paying unemployment insurance, vacations or comp time. All of their workers are full-time, and never arrive late or are absent because of family problems; moreover, if they don't like the pay of 25 cents an hour and refuse to work, they are locked up in isolation cells. There are approximately 2 million inmates in state, federal and private prisons throughout the country. According to California Prison Focus, "no other society in human history has imprisoned so many of its own citizens." The figures show that the United States has locked up more people than any other country: a half million more than China, which has a population five times greater than the U.S. Statistics reveal that the United States holds 25% of the world's prison population, but only 5% of the world's people. From less than 300,000 inmates in 1972, the jail population grew to 2 million by the year 2000. In 1990 it was one million. Ten years ago there were only five private prisons in the country, with a population of 2,000 inmates; now, there are 100, with 62,000 inmates. It is expected that by the coming decade, the number will hit 360,000, according to reports. What has happened over the last 10 years? Why are there so many prisoners? "The private contracting of prisoners for work fosters incentives to lock people up. Prisons depend on this income. Corporate stockholders who make money off prisoners' work lobby for longer sentences, in order to expand their workforce. The system feeds itself," says a study by the Progressive Labor Party, which accuses the prison industry of being "an imitation of Nazi Germany with respect to forced slave labor and concentration camps." The prison industry complex is one of the fastest-growing industries in the United States and its investors are on Wall Street. "This multimillion-dollar industry has its own trade exhibitions, conventions, websites, and mail-order/Internet catalogs. It also has direct advertising campaigns, architecture companies, construction companies, investment houses on Wall Street, plumbing supply companies, food supply companies, armed security, and padded cells in a large variety of colors." According to the Left Business Observer, the federal prison industry produces 100% of all military helmets, ammunition belts, bullet-proof vests, ID tags, shirts, pants, tents, bags, and canteens. Along with war supplies, prison workers supply 98% of the entire market for equipment assembly services; 93% of paints and paintbrushes; 92% of stove assembly; 46% of body armor; 36% of home appliances; 30% of headphones/microphones/speakers; and 21% of office furniture. Airplane parts, medical supplies, and much more: prisoners are even raising seeing-eye dogs for blind people. Crime Goes Down, Jail Population Goes Up According to reports by human rights organizations, these are the factors that increase the profit potential for those who invest in the prison industry complex: Jailing persons convicted of non-violent crimes, and long prison sentences for possession of microscopic quantities of illegal drugs. Federal law stipulates five years' imprisonment without possibility of parole for possession of 5 grams of crack or 3.5 ounces of heroin, and 10 years for possession of less than 2 ounces of rock-cocaine or crack. A sentence of 5 years for cocaine powder requires possession of 500 grams - 100 times more than the quantity of rock cocaine for the same sentence. Most of those who use cocaine powder are white, middle-class or rich people, while mostly Blacks and Latinos use rock cocaine. In Texas, a person may be sentenced for up to two years' imprisonment for possessing 4 ounces of marijuana. Here in New York, the 1973 Nelson Rockefeller anti-drug law provides for a mandatory prison sentence of 15 years to life for possession of 4 ounces of any illegal drug. The passage in 13 states of the "three strikes" laws (life in prison after being convicted of three felonies), made it necessary to build 20 new federal prisons. One of the most disturbing cases resulting from this measure was that of a prisoner who for stealing a car and two bicycles received three 25-year sentences. Longer sentences. The passage of laws that require minimum sentencing, without regard for circumstances. A large expansion of work by prisoners creating profits that motivate the incarceration of more people for longer periods of time. More punishment of prisoners, so as to lengthen their sentences. History Of Prison Labor In The United States Prison labor has its roots in slavery. After the 1861-1865 Civil War, a system of "hiring out prisoners" was introduced in order to continue the slavery tradition. Freed slaves were charged with not carrying out their sharecropping commitments (cultivating someone else's land in exchange for part of the harvest) or petty thievery - which were almost never proven - and were then "hired out" for cotton picking, working in mines and building railroads. From 1870 until 1910 in the state of Georgia, 88% of hired-out convicts were Black. In Alabama, 93% of "hired-out" miners were Black. In Mississippi, a huge prison farm similar to the old slave plantations replaced the system of hiring out convicts. The notorious Parchman plantation existed until 1972. During the post-Civil War period, Jim Crow racial segregation laws were imposed on every state, with legal segregation in schools, housing, marriages and many other aspects of daily life. "Today, a new set of markedly racist laws is imposing slave labor and sweatshops on the criminal justice system, now known as the prison industry complex," comments the Left Business Observer. Who is investing? At least 37 states have legalized the contracting of prison labor by private corporations that mount their operations inside state prisons. The list of such companies contains the cream of U.S. corporate society: IBM, Boeing, Motorola, Microsoft, AT&T, Wireless, Texas Instrument, Dell, Compaq, Honeywell, Hewlett-Packard, Nortel, Lucent Technologies, 3Com, Intel, Northern Telecom, TWA, Nordstrom's, Revlon, Macy's, Pierre Cardin, Target Stores, and many more. All of these businesses are excited about the economic boom generation by prison labor. Just between 1980 and 1994, profits went up from $392 million to $1.31 billion. Inmates in state penitentiaries generally receive the minimum wage for their work, but not all; in Colorado, they get about $2 per hour, well under the minimum. And in privately-run prisons, they receive as little as 17 cents per hour for a maximum of six hours a day, the equivalent of $20 per month. The highest-paying private prison is CCA in Tennessee, where prisoners receive 50 cents per hour for what they call "highly skilled positions." At those rates, it is no surprise that inmates find the pay in federal prisons to be very generous. There, they can earn $1.25 an hour and work eight hours a day, and sometimes overtime. They can send home $200-$300 per month. Thanks to prison labor, the United States is once again an attractive location for investment in work that was designed for Third World labor markets. A company that operated a maquiladora (assembly plant in Mexico near the border) closed down its operations there and relocated to San Quentin State Prison in California. In Texas, a factory fired its 150 workers and contracted the services of prisoner-workers from the private Lockhart Texas prison, where circuit boards are assembled for companies like IBM and Compaq. Oregon State Representative Kevin Mannix recently urged Nike to cut its production in Indonesia and bring it to his state, telling the shoe manufacturer that "there won't be any transportation costs; we're offering you competitive prison labor (here)." Voicing his discontent with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling in United States v. Pineda-Moreno, which declared the warrantless use of a GPS tracking device to be constitutional, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski warned, “We are taking a giant leap into the unknown, and the consequences for ourselves and our children may be dire and irreversible. Some day, soon, we may wake up and find we’re living in Oceania.”
Indeed, we are already living in George Orwell’s totalitarian state known as Oceania, where the all-seeing government sees and tracks everything we do. By asserting that the police can constitutionally sneak onto a private driveway without a warrant and stick a GPS tag on your car so that they can remotely track you, the Ninth Circuit didn’t necessarily break any new ground. Rather, they merely confirmed what we have suspected all along: that the concept of private property is dead and along with it, the right against unreasonable searches and seizures once protected by the Fourth Amendment. Having outstripped our ability as humans to control it, technology has become our Frankenstein’s monster. Delighted with technology’s conveniences, its ability to make our lives easier by doing an endless array of tasks faster and more efficiently, we have given it free rein in our lives, with little thought to the legal or moral ramifications of doing so. Thus, we have no one but ourselves to blame for the fact that technology now operates virtually autonomously according to its own invasive code, respecting no one’s intimate moments or privacy and impervious to the foibles of human beings and human relationships. Global Positioning System (GPS)For example, consider how enthusiastically we welcomed Global Positioning System (GPS) devices into our lives. We’ve installed this satellite-based technology in everything from our phones to our cars to our pets. Yet by ensuring that we never get lost, never lose our loved ones and never lose our wireless signals, we are also making it possible for the government to never lose sight of us, as well. GPS, originally known as Navstar, is funded and operated by none other than the U.S. Department of Defense. The U.S. military controls the satellites used by GPS devices and transmits signals to ground GPS receivers. The U.S Air Force, by means of ground stations, sustains 24 operational GPS satellites at all times. These synchronized satellites emit signals at the same time. A GPS receiver located on earth collects the signals that travel at the speed of light. The receiver calculates the distance to the satellites by determining the time it takes for the emitted signal to reach the GPS receiver. Once a time is determined for at least four of the GPS satellites, the receiver can pinpoint your location in three dimensions, including latitude, longitude, and altitude. While many Americans are literally lost without their GPS devices, it has also become a ubiquitous convenience for law enforcement agencies. For example, in 2009, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) introduced a prototype “smart” police car. This smart cruiser is the most advanced of its kind, equipped with license plate cameras, computers, a GPS projectile launcher, and even a heat detector in the front grill to differentiate between people and animals. The license plate reader can scan and download five to eight thousand license plates per shift. It saves the information it collects and can access the information instantaneously through the computer system installed in the car. If a stolen or wanted vehicle comes up in the scan, the license plate reader will automatically label the vehicle as a threat and a camera will take a colored picture of the vehicle and send the GPS coordinates of the vehicle to the police station. In addition to the high tech license plate readers and cameras, the smart car is equipped with GPS-enabled projectiles. The device is similar to a dart launcher and is near the front bumper of the vehicle. The projectile is three inches in diameter. When engaged, the device shoots the GPS projectile at the target vehicle. The law enforcement agent inside the car arms and fires the projectile. With the aid of a military grade laser, the law enforcement agent can aim with tremendous precision. Once attached to the target, the projectiles have the capability of tracking the target in real time for days. The LAPD is currently shopping for a manufacturer willing to mass produce these cars in order to make them available to law enforcement agencies across the country. Frankly, given how attached Americans have become to their cell phones–and how easily trackable, as a result, it’s a wonder the government even bothers with any other technologies. Currently, cell phone service providers have the ability to pinpoint a phone’s location to an area as small as a city block. (It should come as no surprise that government agents have wasted little time in adding this technology to their bag of tricks, employing GPS on multiple occasions to track individuals without establishing probable cause or obtaining a search warrant.) Most corporate cell phone providers can also store vast amounts of data containing the location of the cell phone and its specific uses (such as the contents of text messages and websites visited), sometimes even in real time. In an effort to handle the massive amount of requests from federal agents for access to the GPS data, several cell phone providers now offer automated services for obtaining internal cell phone data. Sprint Nextel, for example, has an entire website devoted to cell phone records that law enforcement officers can access. Called the Mobile Locator, the system allows law enforcement to access information, such as call history, without a search warrant, thus completely bypassing the protections afforded us by the Fourth Amendment. It also enables government agents to monitor an individual in real-time on a zoomable, online map. A recent study by Indiana University reveals the extent to which government agents are making use of this resource. According to the study, over a period of 13 months, Sprint responded to eight million requests from law enforcement for GPS data. In addition to GPS data, Sprint also stores IP data and URL web history for a two-year period, which it also makes available to law enforcement upon request. Intelligence and law enforcement agencies insist that a search warrant is not required to access the information because cell phone users, having disclosed their information to a third party, have no reasonable expectation of privacy anyhow. All the while, the American people remain clueless about the existence of these databases, the ease with which law enforcement agents can access them, and their overall loss of privacy. The bottom line: there really is no place to hide in the American Oceania. As Judge Kozinski concludes: You can preserve your anonymity from prying eyes, even in public, by traveling at night, through heavy traffic, in crowds, by using a circuitous route, disguising your appearance, passing in and out of buildings and being careful not to be followed. But there’s no hiding from the all-seeing network of GPS satellites that hover overhead, which never sleep, never blink, never get confused and never lose attention. Nor is there respite from the dense network of cell towers that honeycomb the inhabited United States. Acting together these two technologies alone can provide law enforcement with a swift, efficient, silent, invisible andcheap way of tracking the movements of virtually anyone and everyone they choose. Most targets won’t know they need to disguise their movements or turn off their cell phones because they’ll have no reason to suspect that Big Brother is watching them. -John W. Whitehead Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Information about the Institute is available at www.rutherford.org. |
REMEMBER TO LIKE! SHARE! SUBSCRIBE! DONATE! www.thevinnyeastwoodshow.com
ALL DONORS GET:
|