• Category Archives News and Politics
  • Boston Bombing Lessons: Martial Law Doesn’t Work

    Only after the curfew in Watertown, Massachusetts, was lifted and alert resident David Hanberry went outside his home to get a smoke, according to news reports, did the case of the Boston Marathon bombing manhunt for suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev crack open. That was when Hanberry saw blood on the tarp of his dry-docked boat and called the police.

    Up until that time, a wide assortment of local, state, and federal officials were engaged in a dragnet that essentially shut down the city of Boston, and included house-to-house searches in the neighborhoods of Watertown, Mass. and New Bedford, Mass., the latter being near where 19-year-old Russian immigrant Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had enrolled in college. Tsarnaev, a Muslim from the Dagestan area of Russia that abuts Chechnya, became a U.S. citizen on September 11 of last year.

    In essence, the lessons from the Boston Marathon mean that the following procedures employed in the week-long manhunt proved to be completely ineffective in apprehending Tsarnaev:

    • House-to-house searches in a dragnet-style;

    • Use of military-style helicopters across the state;

    • Use of tanks and armored vehicles on the streets of Boston, Cambridge, Watertown, and New Bedford;

    • Shutting down the city, except for limited coffee shops;

    • Stopping all public transportation;

    • Banning taxi service across the city of Boston; and

    • Abandoning the federal Posse Comitatus law banning the use of soldiers in law enforcement.

    Moreover, the use of curfews in a number of towns actually likely delayed apprehension of the suspect, as the curfew essentially took more than a million pairs of eyes off possible getaway scenes.

    Veteran police investigators have traditionally rejected the dragnet because they see it as a waste of police resources, but in the post-bombing panic, politicians demanded that police on the beat appear to be doing everything they could to solve the crisis. In this case, that appearance included a curfew that amounted to searching and hassling people who were clearly not in cahoots with the bombing suspects. Police detained and searched anyone on the streets of Boston and Watertown, even searching famous local news reporters multiple times during the course of the manhunt. In some instances, news reporters received death threats from over-zealous police officers.

    In the end, if the goal of the terrorists was to terrorize, the terrorists won in Boston. Rather than returning to its ordinary business, one of the world’s greatest cities was terrorized, and even shut down, for days by the two suspects identified by authorities as Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his older (deceased) brother Tamerlan. The two presumably hated America for its freedom, and were able to get the government to take away much of those freedoms from its citizens for a period of time.

    Full article: http://www.thenewame … ial-law-doesn-t-work


  • Are we becoming a police state? Five things that have civil liberties advocates nervous

    Is our Constitution under siege?

    Many civil liberties advocates fear it might be. They’re worried about a provision tucked into the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, approved by the Senate last week, that would allow the military to detain without a trial any American citizen accused of being a terrorist, or of supporting terrorists who plot attacks against the United States. The ACLU called the proposal “an extreme position that will forever change our country.”

    The indefinite detention provision is just one of many trends in policing and law enforcement that have civil liberties advocates alarmed. New external threats, as well as technological advancements, are posing new challenges to our Constitutional rights, advocates say. Policymakers are debating those issues in Congress and in the courts right now, and the decisions they make could have fundamental consequences for what it means to be an American.

    Here are five issues that are especially worrisome to civil liberties watchdogs:

    1. Indefinite military detentions of U.S. citizens

    2. Targeting U.S. citizens for killing

    3. Arresting witnesses for recording police actions

    4. Using GPS to track your every move

    5. Surveillance drones spying on American soil

    Full article: http://www.pbs.org/w … cates-nervous/12563/


  • Sen. Feinstein: Treating Bombing Suspect as an Enemy Combatant Would Be Unconstitutional

    On Fox News Sunday, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Dianne Feinstein D-CA said she “believes very strongly” that the Boston bombing suspect should be read his Miranda rights and given a lawyer.

    “I think that’s the only legal way to proceed. I do not believe under the military commission law that he is eligible for that enemy combatant status. It would be unconstitutional to do that,” Sen. Feinstein said.

    via Sen. Feinstein: Treating Bombing Suspect as an Enemy Combatant Would Be Unconstitutional

    I do not agree with Feinstein on much (in fact, this is the only specific case I can recall) but she is right here. If the Constitution is only going to apply when it is popular or when the government says so then it may as well not apply at all. This guy is an American citizen and he gets the same rights as everyone else or we have already lost the freedoms we are supposedly protecting.