Civil Liberties

26 Americans, mostly CIA operatives, are currently on trial in absentia in Italy for the kidnapping and “extraordinary rendition” of a radical Muslim cleric, Abu Omar, who was taken to Egypt to be tortured. On Thursday, Italy’s top counterterrorism official, Bruno Megale, explained in court how they identified the CIA operatives responsible for Omar’s kidnapping: Megale obtained records of all cellphone traffic from the transmission tower nearest the spot where Abu Omar was abducted, for a 2 1/2 -hour period around the time he disappeared. There were 2,000 calls. Then, using a computer program, Megale was able to narrow down the pool by tracing the phones that had called each other, in other words, an indication of a group of people working together. Seventeen phone numbers, which showed intensifying use around the time of the abduction, were pinpointed. By following all other calls made from those phones, the investigators ultimately identified 60 numbers, including that of a CIA officer working undercover at the U.S. Embassy in Rome. ...

The UK’s ridiculous laws are not only being used to infringe free speech in the UK, as when a 15-year-old picketing the Church of Scientology is given a citation for a sign referring to Scientology as a “cult," but to chill speech elsewhere as a result of its bad libel laws, where it seems to be all-too-easy for a deep-pocketed plaintiff to get a judgment against publishers of legitimate criticism. Recent examples include Khalid Salim A. Bin Mahfouz’s lawsuit against U.S. author Rachel Ehrenfeld for her book Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It, which resulted in a $225,000 default judgment against Ehrenfeld in London, even though she doesn’t live there and the book wasn’t published there; Bin Mahfouz obtained standing because some individuals in Britain purchased the book. This has led to the State of New York proposing an amendment to its code of civil practice to prohibit the enforcement of foreign libel judgments. Bin Mahfouz has similarly successfully sued in the UK against other writers 33 times for linking him to terrorism. Similarly, a Ukrainian tycoon, Rinat Akhmetov, has sued in London against a Ukrainian newspaper, the Kyiv Post, owned by an American, even though it’s not published in the UK, on the grounds that 100 subscribers are located in Britain. Akhmetov has also successfully sued Obozrevatel (Observer), a Ukrainian Internet news site that’s not even in English, in the UK. I think New York has the right idea. Better yet would be if Britain reforms its libel and insult laws. UPDATE (May 23, 2008): The Crown Prosecution Service has declined to prosecute the boy with the “cult” sign, stating that “Our advice is that it is not abusive or insulting and there is no offensiveness (as opposed to criticism), neither in the idea expressed nor in the mode of expression.” Yet abuse, insult, and offense should not be the standard in any case. Ed Brayton has now commented on that story at Dispatches from the Culture Wars. ...

Dennis Prager writes, regarding the California Supreme Court’s decision to strike down a ban on same-sex marriage, that: The sexual confusion that same-sex marriage will create among young people is not fully measurable. Suffice it to say that, contrary to the sexual know-nothings who believe that sexual orientation is fixed from birth and permanent, the fact is that sexual orientation is more of a continuum that ranges from exclusive heterosexuality to exclusive homosexuality. Much of humanity - especially females - can enjoy homosexual sex. It is up to society to channel polymorphous human sexuality into an exclusively heterosexual direction - until now, accomplished through marriage. It sounds like he thinks that female heterosexuality is so tenuous that it must be enforced by the power of law. Does he also think this is a justification for denying civil liberties and rights to women? Ed Brayton gives a good fisking to Prager’s entire crazy essay on this subject, showing that his arguments are very similar to arguments that were made against integration and interracial marriage in response to Supreme Court decisions. ...

The Washington Post reports that there have been more than 250 recent cases of the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency giving “pre-flight cocktail” injections of psychotropic drugs to foreigners being deported. These injections of antipsychotic drugs have been given to people with no history of mental illness and for no medical justification, with the only apparent purpose to sedate them during their flights. The practice of “involuntary chemical restraint of detainees” without medical justification violates some international human rights codes, according to the Post, and is banned in several countries. Confidential documents obtained by the newspaper indicate that in some of the cases they report, detainees were not able to be given additional injections during layovers because to do so would be illegal in the countries in question. These sedations violate the government’s own rules, which only permit sedation if the individual has a mental illness which requires the drugs or if the person is aggressive to the point of creating a danger to those around them. The Post reports that during 2007, there were 67 people deported with medical escorts with no medical justification, 53 of whom were given psychiatric drugs, and 48 of whom had no documented history of violence. Most of those given drugs appear to be individuals who had previously resisted deportation. One man deported to Nigeria was still under the effects of the drugs for four days after his arrival. One drug often reported used was Haldol, which created some controversy during George H.W. Bush’s presidency when it was reported that he took the drug to avoid jet lag; some speculated that this drug was the cause of his vomiting at a dinner with (and vomiting on) the Prime Minister of Japan. A related story in the Post looks at 80 cases of deaths of immigration detainees, of which 30 were found to be “questionable,” including two in Arizona. (Via The Agitator.)

Yesterday, Arizona Superior Court Judge William O’Neill struck down a Pinal County Court ruling that Dale Bell’s San Tan Flat steakhouse is a “dance hall," freeing Bell from a ban against customers dancing outside his establishment. Pinal County’s attempt to ban dancing and extract fines from Bell had been hanging over his business since he opened in 2005. Eamon Knight (2008-05-02): I have to ask: how on earth did this silly case get started? Did the neighbours complain about noise? Some petty control freak at City Hall decided to check every old law on the books? Someone had a grudge on the owner? ...

Today is Labor Day in much of Latin America, May Day or International Worker’s Day in many European countries, China, Cuba, and the Russian Federation (and in the U.S. and UK, though it’s not a federal holiday in either), Beltane for pagans and Wiccans (approximately the midpoint between the vernal equinox and summer solstice, though in reality it’s off by a few days), and the National Day of Prayer for evangelical Christians. While they pretend the day of prayer is for all religions that believe in the Abrahamic god, Shirley Dobson, wife of James Dobson of Focus on the Faily, runs the national task force and requires coordinators to sign this statement of faith: I believe that the Holy Bible is the inerrant Word of The Living God. I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the only One by which I can obtain salvation and have an ongoing relationship with God. I believe in the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, his virgin birth, his sinless life, his miracles, the atoning work of his shed blood, his resurrection and ascension, his intercession and his coming return to power and glory. I believe that those who follow Jesus are family and there should be unity among all who claim his name. I agree that these statements are true in my life.So much for the “Judeo” in “Judeo-Christian." Jews, Muslims, and liberal Christians don’t qualify–this is an explicitly sectarian organization, endorsed by government in blatant contradiction of the First Amendment. Pharyngula reports that the Minnesota Atheists have declared today a National Day of Reason and will be demonstrating at the state capitol in St. Paul. By the way, today is also Loyalty Day in the United States, declared by every U.S. president every year on this day since 1958 as an anticommunist counter to May Day. So there’s a wide variety of possible celebrations–you can thank the labor workers of the past for the 8-hour workday, rage against capitalist exploitation, express your loyalty to our wise and just leaders, celebrate the act of pretending to talk to an invisible being, or be thankful that you’ve been fortunate enough to have the ability to reason.

Ed Brayton at Dispatches from the Culture Wars links to and comments on an essay by Elizabeth Castelli on the history of Christian persecution, real and imagined. It’s interesting how many Christians argue that they are being persecuted, even as they are engaged in persecution themselves. Which reminds me again of Robby Berry’s classic “Life in Our Anti-Christian America." Hume's Ghost (2008-04-29): It reminds me of white supremacists complaining about being persecuted by blacks.One of the most pathetic things that has always struck me when listening to white supremacists speak is their sense of being persecuted by an oppressive minority and/or the forces of liberalism. It is difficult to make sense of the assertion that white males in the USA are disadvantaged unless you consider that supremacists are 1)scapegoating an Other they are prejudiced against for perceived societal failings and 2)that their definition of being persecuted amounts to not being allowed to persecute others.Another group that shares the same persecution complex is that of the religious right. More specifically, the dominionist or Christian nationalist elements of the religious right which similarly consider the failures of society to stem from an oppressive minority and also feels that not being allowed to enforce religious orthodoxy on others amounts to being persecuted. I suspect, however, that it is easier to see the bigotry underlying the persecution complex of the white supremacists than it is from the Christian supremacists, for the obvious reason that we've as a nation already rejected the ideology of white supremacism.For example, if one were to hear someone say the following, it would be fairly obvious that the person making the statement is a bigot:You can be any race you want and PROUD of it... except white. I watch tv and flip around and you've got networks for gays, for women, for Spanish speakers ... There's even BET a network just for blacks. Obviously, the owners of the network are black and are proud of it, but if the owners were white and tried to create a White Entertainment Television channel all Hell would break loose. Is that really that different than this comment agreeing with Ron Paul's view that Christmas is under siege?You can be ANY faith you want and PROUD of it... except Christian. I walk around one of the largest malls in California, during the holidays, festive colors everywhere, and what is directly in the center of the mall? A massive menorah. Obviously, the owners are Jewish and expressing their faith. Were the owners Christian and tried to do the same with a crucifix, Hell would've broken loose. ...

It’s a letter to the editor from Jeremy Gunn, director of the Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief at the ACLU, in response to an idiotic falsehood-ridden column by Pat Boone. If anyone ever comes across an attempt by the anti-ACLU crowd to actually respond to the content of Gunn’s letter, I’d be interested in seeing it. I suspect it will most likely be ignored, and any alleged responses will not respond to its content. (Via Dispatches from the Culture Wars.)

Arizona’s legislature, like Florida’s, is considering creating “In God We Trust” license plates. Indiana already has them, which, unlike other specialty plates, require no additional fee. The ACLU’s lawsuit in Indiana against the plates was recently dismissed. In Arizona, the state Senate approved legislation (HB 2046) sponsored by Rep. Ron Gould (R-Lake Havasu City) which would require the Department of Transportation to provide “In God We Trust” license plates if some organization pays the $32,000 necessary for design costs. The bill was originally for “Arizona Highways” license plates when introduced in January, but has been modified into a religious proposal. It looks to me like Gould’s proposal puts the imprimatur of government on the promotion of religion, which violates both the U.S. and Arizona Constitutions. A contrary argument would be that there’s no financial expenditure by the government, since the fees to produce such plates come from the individuals rather than the government. But by allowing the expression of a particular religious sentiment (supporting monotheistic religions) and not other religious sentiments (including disbelief in any religion), it will clearly favor one set of viewpoints on religion over others. UPDATE (May 1, 2008): Correction, the Florida license plate under consideration was one which said “I believe” with a picture of a cross. The Florida legislature looks set to allow the legislation to die without passage. ...

Michael Shermer of the Skeptics Society and Greg Lukianoff of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education debated back and forth for five days in the Los Angeles Times on speech codes, faculty bias, and “Expelled.” Actually, they were pretty much in agreement on “Expelled." (Where they disagree on other issues, I think Lukianoff generally has the better of the argument, though I side with Shermer on the rights of private institutions.) I happen to support both of their organizations, and I think it’s interesting to point out that FIRE is the major organization defending the freedom of speech of students and faculty in academia, though they’ve not noticed any issues of persecution of ID advocates worthy of their attention. They actually deal with real cases of suppression, censorship, and indoctrination, not phony cases like those in “Expelled.”