EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION:

DUE PROCESS UNDER ASSAULT

The Bush Administration is appealing a decision of Joyce Hens Green that would prevent them from exerting powers that only the most arrogant tyrants would demand. Bush, Rumsfeld Cheney and the rest of the gang would like to be able to designate anyone they please as an "enemy combatant". Once so designated, the Administration would have the power to hold such a person as long as they please, without charging them with anything, without showing them the evidence against them, without allowing them to challenge their detention, and without giving them access to an attorney.

In Judge Green's words, taken from her decision:

"Although this nation unquestionably must take strong action under the leadership of the Commander in Chief to protect itself against enormous and unprecidented threats, that necessity cannot negate the existence of the most basic fundamental rights for which the people of this country have fought and died for well over 200 years."

Quoting directly from a February editorial by Bob Herbert of the New York Times:

"A government with the power to spirit people away and declare that's the end of the matter is exactly the kind of government the United States has always claimed to oppose, and has sometimes fought. For the United States itself to become that kind of government is spectacularly scary."

LHS

ARE WE READY FOR INTERNET VOTING?

Just the mention of voting over the internet brings a host of concerns and skepticism to the minds of most Americans. How can it be secure? Will it discriminate against people who do not have internet access? How can we stop ineligible people from voting?

Check out a great website, www.electioncenter.org to read in detail about current ideas and ongoing tests. Those who are working on perfecting internet voting are addressing all of the problems that readily come to mind, and some that do not. One of their main conclusions is that internet voting should be introduced in increments that can be tested by experience.

Internet voting will be a quantum-leap improvement over the present system. Greater voter participation is only one of the reasons, albeit an important one. Only 55.27 percent of American citizens of voting age participated in the 2004 presidential election. Since 1975, the number ranged from 36.4% to 39.8% for the interim congressional elections. Certainly these numbers need improvement.

Internet voting will be very beneficial in other ways:

• People voting from their own computers will not be rushed, especially when voting on propositions.
• Ballots can be made available in any language, simply by a mouse-click.
• Family groups that are insecure about the process will gather around a computer and help each other. (Yes, yes, this does adversely affect the secrecy of ballots, but I believe that the net effect will be positive.)
• The ballot website can have detailed instructions and answer many voter questions.
• Voting can be extended over many days.
• People will not have to leave work, get up early, or be otherwise inconvenienced.
• The problem of long lines (which mysteriously appeared in liberal neighborhoods in Ohio and elsewhere) will be eliminated.
• The use of schools, firehouses and volunteers will be made unnecessary.
• Election day will be easy to organize and execute.
• The number of elections can be increased so that propositions can have their own vote day, allowing each proposition to be discussed in the media, and better understood by the voters.
• Non-binding opinion polls can be run by elected officials, either as tests of the system, or so that the official can get a sense of how the people really feel about an issue.
• The last chad will have been hung.
• Banks and libraries can set up computers as a service to people who otherwise do not have Internet access.
• The voter registration procedure can be done on-line and the cut-off period can be dramatically reduced. Voters anywhere in the world will be able to vote without the problem of securing absentee ballots, and the cumbersome process of absentee voting by mail will no longer be necessary.
• Similar systems can be developed for petitions, local issues, candidate eligibility signatures and other uses.

It is understood that any internet voting system must be reliable, tamper-proof, economical, verifiable, accessible, user friendly and maintain ballot secrecy. In addition, an internet voting system must be hacker-proof, virus-proof and jam-proof. It must earn the public perception of having all of those qualities.

We must also acknowledge that there will be many security problems, some easy to solve, and some more difficult. The voter must be clearly identified, and his/her eligibility to vote must be verified. Digital signatures or biometric data may be used if cost and privacy concerns can be addressed.

Possible intermediate steps between the current system, and full internet voting can allow for a gradual introduction. For example, ballots can be made available on the internet, but filled out, signed and returned in the traditional manner through the Post Office. Computers, instead of, or in addition to, voting machines can be used at traditional voting places, with the volunteers verifying proper voter identity, as they do now.

At the present time there is no official comprehensive database of United States citizens. At the very least, one is needed to verify that all citizens pay taxes. The same database can be used to associate voters with their Social Security numbers and residencies to verify that they are eligible to vote and that they each vote only once.

Current voting standards do not address internet voting. New system requirements and laws with severe penalties must be created to deter fraudulent activity. The Federal Election Commission has created the guidelines that any new system must be measured against.

Election frauds must be anticipated and prevented. One possible scam might be for someone to put up a look-alike voting site with a URL that is similar to the real election website, and somehow guide voters to it. Once he has the voter information, the charlatan can alter the votes and re-submit the ballot to the real site. Another scam might be perpetrated by a knowledgeable network administrator who can intercept votes entered on a local area network.

The web is now being used for countless unscientific polls conducted by news and opinion programs as well as corporate proxy votes, and Labor Union, College and High School elections Unofficial internet voting has caught on and is spreading rapidly. It is only a matter of time before we elect our Presidents in this way. American Panthers takes a position in favor of the gradual introduction of internet voting.

LHS

WHAT IS GOING WRONG?
WHO HAS LET US DOWN?

Our founding fathers could not have imagined the takeover of our government by an extremist group such as today’s neocons. They could not have imagined the nationwide intimidation that allowed the domination of our press. Worse, they could not have imagined how people who understand freedom would not have the courage to fight for it. Of course, it’s not that clear-cut, but the bottom line is that our freedoms are under attack, our poor working class has been reduced to virtual slavery, and terms like “God Bless America”, and “Support our Troops” have been turned into intimidating rallying cries for an extremist right wing that has now achieved borderline control of our nation.

The neocons really do not care who they partner with. They can twist their perverted logic to justify almost any political alliance. We may feel comfortable calling the current battle an ideological one, but there is a more accurate description.

It’s the money, stupid!

What we are fighting about is which groups get to benefit from the multi-trillion dollar federal budget, and which groups get to pay into it. The rules for this battle could have been written by Darwin himself. The wealthy survive and get wealthier, the poor barely survive.

America’s defenses against an extremist takeover have been failing us. These defenses, which include the Constitution, the courts, the free press, the political opposition, and the just plain downtrodden, have not been up to the job so far.

The Constitution has been overridden by the use of fear and the Patriot Act, the courts have been weakened by political appointees, the free press and political opposition have been intimidated, and the downtrodden have been trodden down.

Well, it may not be that clear or that gloomy. Hurricane Katrina has again exposed the ineptitude and the dishonesty of the Bush Administration. At this writing, the majority of Americans disapprove of the Bush leadership. If things keep going this way, the neocons will loose power in 2006, and be out of power in 2008. If that happens, there are two frightening facts that we must recognize and address. One is that they were able to get as far as they did in the first place. The other is that they have tons of money and determination, and, like Darwin said, they believe that in the battle for survival, anything goes.

Just how far did they get? They control the Supreme Court, the White House and Congress. They have allied with the Military-Industrial complex and seem to be able to convince the public to go to war at their will. Forty percent of high school biology teachers now avoid teaching Evolution. They have allied with the drug companies and oil companies to drain the people’s money and divide it among themselves. They got very far indeed.

Reluctantly I have come to the conclusion that the institution that failed us the worst was the political opposition. In the presidential primary campaign, very few Democrats were willing to say outright that the war was wrong, and that they were flimflammed by Bush’s lies about WMD. Of the candidates, only Kucinich and Sharpton were willing to say that we should pull out. It should not have been an embarrassment to admit that you voted for the war because you were afraid that Hussain had WMDs and that he may have intended to use them. Even if they thought Bush was lying about the WMDs, it would have been very difficult for any member of Congress to vote against the war and take the chance that their vote would result in an American city being annihilated by a nuclear bomb? Why couldn’t Kerry admit that?

Even now, the most prominent fighter against this disastrous war is not an opposing politician, but a saddened mother who lost her son. We should all support, praise, admire and be grateful to Cindy Sheehan for her courage and the sacrifices she has made.

So far it seems as if most Democrats have not learned from their mistakes. The so-called front-runner for the Democratic 2008 nomination, Hillary Clinton, advocates a stay-the-course position on the war. Having to find a way to defeat Hillary would be Karl Rove’s wet dream. He would have an easy time ridiculing, demeaning and intimidating her. People would say, as they did with Kerry, that they did not like the Republican candidate but they could not vote for Hillary! Ridicule works!

The majority of Democrats are still hanging onto the stay-the-course position, included Senators Joe Biden and minority leader Harry Reid. However, as it becomes more politically acceptable, the pressure is mounting for Democrats to boldly step forward with an end-the-war position. One is Kweisi Mfume, the former NAACP president who is running for the open Maryland Senate seat. Others are Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, and Representatives Barbara Lee and Lynn Woolsey of California. However, I must admit that I do not understand why it is taking so long for the tide to shift.

The second biggest failure was by the press. Even the New York Times admitted that they sometimes put Bush’s news releases on the front page while the contradicting evidence, which often came when the story was no longer hot, was printed on the inside pages. The rallying cry of “Liberal Press” successfully intimidated some of the honest press into giving equal weight to what they thought was true, and to the spin of the neocons. They did not want to be perceived as biased, and they were burdened with the normal insecurities and nagging consciences of honest people. Some were also intimidated by neocon-induced threats from their advertisers.

LHS