Patriot Act: A Poor Compromise On Civil Liberties by Nadeem A. Tusneem

20 March 2006

In October 2001, the Karachi Stock Exchange (KSE) in Pakistan was holding at 1100. On March 18, 2004, the index hit 5000, a gain of nearly 400% over a 30 month period. Karachi Stock Exchange was declared as the “best performing stock market of the world for the year 2002″. One of the catalyst for this remarkable performance was the passage of the Patriot Act in the United States after the tragic events of September 11, 2001.

The negative repercussions of the Patriot Act forced many Pakistanis in the United States to move back to Pakistan, taking back their wealth with them. Many who did not leave also moved their wealth out of the United States. As the markets in the US continued to drop, the markets in Pakistan enjoyed their best times ever. Much of it thanks to the Patriot Act.

The Patriot Act as it is today allows the FBI to order any person or organization to surrender “any tangible thing” - including library, medical and financial records - so long as the agency certified that the order was part of an investigation against terrorism or secret intelligence activities (Section 215). The FBI does not have to supply any reason for believing that the target of the investigation is a criminal. Section 213 of the same law authorizes government agents to sneak into a person’s home when the occupant is away, conduct a search and remove evidence, yet not have to inform the occupant until much later.

While these provisions provide a useful tool in the war against terrorism, they have the potential of being abused. According to one report, the Justice department has acknowledged regularly employing the Patriot Act powers in cases other than terrorism. Exactly what those cases are is a matter of anyone’s guess.

For the Pakistani community who was hugely impacted by some of the provisions in the Patriot Act, the Act was very much a reminder of conditions in Pakistan, where the government had complete access to everyone’s records and wiretapping by intelligence agencies on anyone who disagreed with the government is commonplace. The term democracy is meaningless if freedom and equality are compromised. Every Muslim community in the United States today is being targeted by the Patriot Act. But one can be sure that it will not stop there. Once the powers provided by the Patriot Act become a routine method, everyone else in the United States will be targeted with it as well.

However, all is not lost. Over 170 communities in 30 states, including New York City, have passed resolutions denouncing some of the provisions of the Patriot Act that threaten civil liberties. Alaska, Hawaii, and Vermont have passed state-wide resolution. It is time for rest of the United States to join this group. The war on terrorism must be fought but not at the price of limiting our freedoms. As Benjamin Franklin said, “they that can give up essential liberty to obtain little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
About the AuthorNadeem Tusneem is a muslim American in the field of science. He runs a website, http://www.cafemuslim.com. The above article originally appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune.


Read Comments (0)

Abortion Bans in South Dakota

6 March 2006

This is just hitting the net. Opponents of abortion have brought a bill to South Dakota, which has been signed into law, that bans most abortions. Their hope is to bring it up to the Supreme Court, which has been conservativised (a new word, you’ll thank me later) by President Bush.

For a further article on it go here.

Leave some feedback, let me know what your thoughts are.

Mad

Abortion


Read Comments (0)

Protest the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act before your rights are gone!

5 March 2006

The Internet Gambling Prohibition Act (IGPA) was defeated in the US Senate in 1999 amid some controversy. But, it’s back. If you are looking to protect your rights in online gambling, whether it be through online casinos where you can play in the popular Texas Hold ‘em poker tournaments, or just buying state lottery tickets online, then continue reading.

The bill intends to amend the Wire Act, whose language isn’t suited for the WWW world. Currently, as determined by the US courts, Internet gambling is not illegal if the servers are located off-shore. The amendent will prohibit all Internet gambling regardless of the location of the servers. It also aims to change the language to include things like poker. This is because the US Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the Wire Act only pertained to online sports betting and not other gambling types like Poker, Blackjack, or even buying lottery tickets. That’s right, lottery tickets.

The Internet Gambling Prohibition Act specifically bans the ability to purchase state lottery tickets online (includes the purchase of a chance or opportunity to win a lottery)…because that’s much worse than walking to the corner store? Is this even necessary?

Arguments Against the Bill

Goodlatte’s site, in regards to Internet gambling, states These activities suck billions of dollars per year out of the U.S. economy, serve as a vehicle for money laundering, undermine families, and threaten the ability of states to enact and enforce their own laws. Yet doesn’t examine why the “activities” suck billions of dollars out of the economy. Could it be because the U.S. government will not allow us to gamble online with U.S. companies with U.S. servers that are, um…in the U.S.? Could it be because our government cannot tax the “activities”? If the concern is the U.S. economy, then why not allow U.S. citizens, who are proud of their freedoms, to gamble online on servers that are in the United States? Tax the activity, and now not only is the U.S. economy not losing, but actually gaining.

Goodlatte’s second-round of justifications for the bill include money laundering, family values, and threats to state laws. So let’s consider these.

  • Money Laundering. Is there a better way to prevent the money laundering than bringing the servers to the United States and regulating the activity of online gambling? The entire practice of gambling in online casinos does not need to be banned in order to prevent money laundering. This is like using a nuclear weapon to fry an egg. Regulation will legitimize the industry, spark the economy, and keep us free Americans to spend our free-time, and earned money, as we see fit.
  • Family Values. Whose family are we talking about here, Goodlatte? Because, apparently by the number of people gambling online, there are quite a few families who feel that the responsible enjoyment of things like Texas Hold ‘em, sports betting, and other forms of poker and card games isn’t reprehensible. So I gather what he’s really saying is it’s against HIS family values. Maybe Goodlatte should read his job description again. He works for us, not the other way around.
  • Threats to State Law. Well, shouldn’t these issues be handled by the state then? If you are so proud and concerned for state laws, why create a bill that will prevent a state from allowing online gambling? This is counter-intuitive, and just a tool that Goodlatte and Boucher are using to try and fog the issue. The threat to state laws is the Federal government stating no one, in any state, may gamble online. What about the states that decide to allow it? What then? If you want to protect state laws, whatever they may be, then the Federal government must not pass any legislation that prevents a state from creating and enforcing their own. This is exactly what the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act is preparing to do.

History of the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act

The Internet Gambling Prohibition Act first showed its ugly head in 1999 as a bill in the U.S. Senate. The bill was largely back by conservative groups like the Christian Coalition and Moral Majority. To counter these groups, Jack Abramoff was hired (by eLottery, inc) as a lobbyist to help block the bill.

Abramoff caused some controversy in how he handled his lobbying efforts. He brought in Louis Sheldon, of Traditional Values Coalition, and Ralph Reed. He funneled payments to each of these men’s organizations (Reed’s Faith and Family Alliance, and Sheldon’s Traditional Values Coalition) by sending checks to others, and having them write checks to the organizations. Reed and Sheldon claimed to be in the dark about the ultimate source of the funds (eLottery, Inc.).

Because of the shady past in how the bill was previously defeated, a concern is that it will pass as a sort of reactionary move. It’s important that we remain focused on the bill itself, and not the interesting strategy Abramoff utilized in having it defeated the first time.

IGPA and the WTO

It’s not just fun with acronyms. The Internet Gambling Prohibition Act sets its sights on more than just the American users, it actual seeks to punish the off-shore companies that market to its citizens.

In the latter half of 2005 the World Trade Organization that the U.S. could not block gambling web sites that are not within U.S. borders. The IGPA would prevent the overseas companies from being able to legally process any credit cards, check, or wire transfers.

The World Trade Organization has given the United States until April, 2006, to adjust its legislation. If it fails to do so the U.S. will face sanctions, which it may choose over actual change.

How to Help Block the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act

You can help block the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act by contacting your congressman. You can find your congressman easily through the House of Representatives web site. Tell your Congressperson that you are against the IGPA. Tell him or her that this is an issue that is important to you.

Secondly, sign our petition against the IGPA. Tell your friends to sign it. Send it to everyone you know. The petition is here: http://www.igpa.info/phpPETITION/index.php

You can also help simply by spreading the word. Not everyone who enjoys the freedom of being able to gamble online knows that the passing of this bill will end his or her’s opportunity to do so. Pass this web site on.

If this bill does end up passing, we will have to mobilize to ensure it does not make it through the Senate.

Internet Gambling Prohibition Act, online gambling, online casinos


Read Comments (0)