top
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

BUSH ADMINISTRATION IS A GOVERNMENT OF INSURRECTION

by profit
Court Calls For Open Detainee Hearings
U.S. Chastised on Immigration Case Secrecy Policy

look forward to a major terrorist attack by shrub and his owners soon to use as cover for the dictator taking full control

4th_reich.jpgx82355.jpg
By Charles Lane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 27, 2002; Page A01


A federal appeals court ruled yesterday that the press and public must be allowed to witness immigration hearings for suspects detained in the Sept. 11 investigation, strongly rebuking the Bush administration for its policy of maximum secrecy in the war on terrorism.

A three-judge panel of the Cincinnati-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit concluded that the news media and ordinary citizens have a constitutional "right of access" to deportation proceedings that was violated by a Sept. 21, 2001, Justice Department order that closed hearings deemed of "special interest" to the terrorism investigation.

Under the order, "The Executive Branch seeks to uproot people's lives, outside the public eye, and behind a closed door," Senior Judge Damon J. Keith wrote in the opinion for the court. "Democracies die behind closed doors. The First Amendment, through a free press, protects the people's right to know that their government acts fairly, lawfully, and accurately in deportation proceedings."

The ruling in the case of Michigan activist Rabih Haddad marked the first time since Sept. 11 that a major component of the Bush administration's legal approach to the anti-terrorism campaign has been declared unconstitutional at the appeals court level, which is a step below the Supreme Court in the federal judicial hierarchy.

The 6th Circuit's ruling is not the last word on the issue. The Justice Department, which had argued that there is no right of access to administrative hearings such as those conducted by immigration judges, may appeal the case either to the full membership of the 6th Circuit or directly to the Supreme Court.

"The Justice Department disagrees with the Court's conclusion that the Department's guidelines for determining which proceedings should be closed are too broad," said Barbara Comstock, a spokeswoman for Attorney General John D. Ashcroft. "The Justice Department has an obligation to exercise all available options to disrupt and prevent terrorism within the bounds of the Constitution and will review today's opinion in light of our duty to protect the American people."

Department lawyers also might wait to shape their full legal strategy until the Philadelphia-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit decides a similar case.

Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson has characterized the issue as "touching on the nation's very ability to defend itself against the continuing threat of a hostile attack from myriad and unknown sources."

Under the "Creppy memo," issued by chief immigration judge Michael J. Creppy on Sept. 21, 2001, the Justice Department considers all immigration hearings involving terror suspects off-limits to the press and public, including the detainee's family.

The most minor disclosure of information could help terrorist groups understand how much intelligence information the government has, Justice Department officials have said, undermining the anti-terror effort.

But Keith wrote that the government had failed to show that secrecy was necessary to protect national security in every case.

"Without question," he wrote, "the events of September 11, 2001, left an indelible mark on our nation, but we as a people are united in the wake of the destruction to demonstrate to the world that we are a country deeply committed to preserving the rights and freedoms guaranteed by our democracy."

If the 6th Circuit's approach were to prevail, current and future deportation hearings would be presumed open, unless the government could convince a federal court that the proceeding had to be completely or partially closed to protect sensitive intelligence.

More than 750 of the 1,200 people detained after Sept. 11 were held on immigration charges. Most have already been deported, released or criminally charged, leaving fewer than 100 in custody, according to the government's latest figures.

Yesterday's ruling does not apply to another small group of detainees who are being held as material witnesses. Only one detainee in custody in the United States, Zacarias Moussaoui, has been formally charged as a conspirator in the Sept. 11 attacks that took more than 3,000 lives in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.

Civil liberties groups praised the ruling as a strong indication that the courts are concerned that the administration has laid claim to unchecked power in the name of protecting national security.

"The court's opinion reaffirms that civil liberties must be protected during all times, including times like this, and that public scrutiny of executive branch activity is particularly important where you have a vulnerable group of people who are facing a loss of liberty and may be without counsel," said Lee Gelernt, a senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union.

Haddad, 41, was charged with overstaying a tourist visa. He was arrested Dec. 14, the same day that federal agents raided the Illinois offices of the Global Relief Foundation, an Islamic charity that Haddad helped found and that the U.S. government suspects of links to terrorists. He is being held in Chicago without bail.

In court papers, U.S. officials have accused Haddad of ties to groups and individuals associated with al Qaeda. Supporters, including Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), who was denied access to one of Haddad's closed hearings, say Haddad could be a victim of an overzealous government crackdown.

Haddad, joined by Conyers and four Michigan newspapers, sued in federal court earlier this year and convinced a judge that the restrictions imposed by Creppy's memo were unconstitutional. The government appealed that decision to the 6th Circuit.


© 2002 The Washington Post Company
by Douglas O'Brien
Friday's Washington Post story failed to inform readers that the FISA abuses took place during the Clinton years, a fact which the New York Times found important enough to put into its subhead, though the story itself did not ever mention the name “Janet Reno.”

“Secret Court Says F.B.I. Aides Misled Judges in 75 Cases,” announced the August 23 New York Times front page headline above this subhead: “Clinton-Era Problems Cited in Sharing Intelligence with Criminal Investigators.” The Washington Post headlined its front page story: “Secret Court Rebuffs Ashcroft.” The subhead: “Justice Dept. Chided on Misinformation.”

Avoiding the name Clinton, and clearly implying impropriety by current Justice Department officials, reporters Dan Eggen and Susan Schmidt referred to how the judges said “the government had misused the law and misled the court dozens of times.”

As Jim Angle pointed out on Friday's Special Report with Brit Hume, the Post news story was contradicted by the paper's editorial the same day. The editorial pointed out what the reporting duo skipped: “Attorney General John Ashcroft is not blamed for these transgressions. Most or all of the misstatements appear to have taken place during the prior administration, and the court notes that the department and bureau wrote new rules last year to ensure the accuracy of FISA applications. The judges, moreover, appear to have no complaints about the quality of applications since Sept. 11.”

GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT AND TELL FEWER LIES.

by Somerset
What's FISA? What on Earth does Clinton have to do with post-Sep. 11th detainees?
by ICE
With the onset of routine violent suppression of dissent as seen last week in Portland the shooting and disappearance of protesters is becoming common place, look forward to a major terrorist attack maybe small-pox or something else very lethal by shrub and his owners soon to use as pretext for the dictator shrub taking full control


We interrupt this web site with a special bulletin...

America is now under marshal law. All constitutional rights have been suspended. Stay in your homes. Do not attempt to contact loved ones, insurance agents or attorneys. SHUT UP, do not attempt to think or depression may occur. Stay in your homes. Curfew is at 7pm sharp after work. Anyone caught outside the gates of their subdivision sectors after curfew WILL BE SHOT. Remain calm, do not panic. Your neighborhood watch officer will be by to collect urine samples in the morning. Anyone caught interfering with the collection of urine samples WILL BE SHOT. Stay in your homes, remain calm. The #1 enemy of progress is question. National security is more important than individual will. All sports broadcasts will proceed as normal. No more than two people may gather anywhere without permission. Use only the drugs prescribed by your boss or supervisor. SHUT UP, be happy. Obey all orders without question. The comfort you've demanded is now mandatory. Be happy, at last everything is done for you.

(excerpt by jello/ice-t)

by this thing here
... this is yer commander in chief, president george bush, kickin' back on my porch here in crawford texas.

now, i'd like to clear up a few things here, real quick like. first, i'm like a king. my word is final. i, along with my stable full of advisors, can do whatever the hell we wanna do. and yer whinin' about it ain't gonna change nothin'. and all them damn, diddly squat, nit pickin' little courts can't do nothin' about it either. cause ya see,... we got a evil threat we gotta deal with. and we're gonna take away yer freedoms in order ta save 'em. just, ahh... just trust me on this one. and do as i tell ya. follow my lead.

and secondly, i get a big kick, let me tell you, a big kick outta all this talk that i was behind september the 10th, no, ahh... the 11th. cuase i, with the help of my internal security apparatus, have evidence that it was all the fault of that evil, lecherous former president of ours, bill clinton. that's right. it was all his fault. our evidence clearly shows that he had secret sexual relations with the sisters of all the hijackers. that's right. honest to god. you know you can trust what i say, can't ya now.

so remember, this administration is as innocent as a little fairy when it comes to this whole business. and it's your responsibility as citizens to follow my lead and say yes when i want you to say yes. that's what bein' a good american is all about. at least down here in crawford texas. and if you don't stop askin' them pesky questions, and gettin' all uppity in the streets, buckin' around like a wild stallion, and sayin no when i want ya to say yes, well, you're gonna be labelled an enemy combatent, just like that. no evidence neccessary. bam! and there go your rights. so don't you let that happen to yerself...

bye ya'all...
by Real Freedom Lover
The Clinton FBI was wrong in 75 instances. No argument. But, why did the "secret" court publicize its FIRST ruling in 28 years NOW? Why? Because they see Ashcroft for what he is - a fascist intent on abolishing our rights. Did Janet Reno ever suggest internment camps for American citizens? Ashcroft is way over the top and the court, and real Americans know it.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$230.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network