Some of you may remember the "piece of legislation" that I described in another thread. That was the legislation I thought might be a follow-up to the Patriot Act that will be submitted to congress by the Bush administration during the upcoming Gulf War 2, playing soon at a Theater of Operations near you.
Well, while attempting to navigate the icey streets of Dallas last night on my way home from work, I listened to the Tavis Smiley Show on NPR (
http://discover.npr.org/rundowns/rundown.jhtml?prgId=14&prgDate=February/24/2003). Look almost half way down the page to the "Ashcroft Alert."
Then go here (
http://www.dailyrotten.com/source-docs/patriot2draft.html) to read the proposal for yourself.
Here are some excerpts:
1. The following will make it possible for "secret arrests."
the government need not disclose information about individuals detained in investigations of terrorism
2. Note how this section indicates "suspected terrorists." It talks about keeping a DNA database.
would allow the Attorney General or Secretary of Defense to collect, analyze, and maintain DNA samples and other identification information from "suspected terrorists" [including:] (1) persons conspiring or attempting to do so; (2) enemy combatants or other battlefield detainees (3) persons suspected of being members of a terrorist organization; and (4) certain classes of aliens... [it] would allow the Attorney General to establish databases of DNA records
3. I personally use PGP. Not often, but the following talks about encryption. Encryption has been the thorn in government's side for ages. I guess that they think, "if you have to make a message private, it must be up to no good."
Title 18 of the United States Code currently contains no prohibition on the use of encrypted communications to plan or facilitate crimes. This proposal would amend federal law to provide that any person who, during the commission of or the attempt to commit a federal felony, knowingly and willfully uses encryption technology to conceal any incriminating communication or information relating to that felony, be imprisoned for an additional period of not fewer than 5 years. These additional penalties are warranted to deter the use of encryption technology to conceal criminal activity. In addition, it [Title 18] does not address the issue of whether software companies and internet service providers should give law enforcement access to "keys" for the purposes of decoding intercepted communications.
4. Finally, this is the section (Section 501, if you want to look at it for yourself) that is the most startling. It allows the government to strip your citizenship.
Specifically, an American could be expatriated if, with the intent to relinquish nationality, he becomes a member of, or provides material support to, a group that the United States has designated as a "terrorist organization," if that group is engaged in hostilities against the United States.This provision also would make explicit that the intent to relinquish nationality need not be manifested in words, but can be inferred from conduct
Now imagine this: A person pisses off the government with his/her use of the right to Free Speech. (It's happened.... remember Senator Joe McCarthy and his witchhunt?) The government arrests you and your family is not informed. You, of course, do not get the opportunity to contact your lawyer or anyone else. Even if you are released without being ultimately charged with crime, you've had your DNA added to the database along with fingerprints, et al. In spreading the word of freedom in your criticism of the government, investigators discover the encrypted emails you sent. They charge you with the provision for "use of encryption" to commit your "crimes." Crimes they have not yet had to even prove they have evidence of. Finally, you just won't shut up.... after 5 years in jail, they strip you of citizenship. You are now without a country.
That scenario is extreme, not probable... but possible. And this link is only a draft, not the final bill, which will have a different language altogether. Remember, the idea with a bill proposal is to get enough people to buy into it to get it on the floor of Congress. The really controversial stuff might not even be introduced yet.
What do you think?
SkinWalker