February, 15 2011, 06:32pm EDT
Senate Passes Short Term Extension of Troublesome Patriot Act Provisions
The Senate voted this evening to extend troublesome Patriot Act provisions through May 27, 2011. The provisions are set to expire at the end of this month. The House passed a ten-month extension of the provisions earlier this week and is expected to vote on the Senate's shorter extension later this week.
WASHINGTON
The Senate voted this evening to extend troublesome Patriot Act provisions through May 27, 2011. The provisions are set to expire at the end of this month. The House passed a ten-month extension of the provisions earlier this week and is expected to vote on the Senate's shorter extension later this week.
The provisions of the Patriot Act due to expire are the John Doe roving wiretap provision, which allows law enforcement to conduct surveillance without identifying the person or location to be wiretapped; Section 215, or the "library records" provision, which allows the government to gain access to "any tangible thing" during investigations; and the "lone wolf" provision, which permits surveillance of non-U.S. persons who are not affiliated with a terrorist group.All three provisions lack proper and fundamental privacy safeguards.
The following can be attributed to Laura W. Murphy, director of the American Civil Liberties Union Washington Legislative Office:
"Every day that Congress continues to push back the February expiration deadline, the Patriot Act continues to erode one of Americans' most basic rights - the freedom from unwarranted government intrusion into their privacy. If there has to be an extension of this law, we urge Congress to use the time well to finally rein in the pernicious impact of the intrusive provisions at stake."
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666LATEST NEWS
'We Do Not Support' ICC Probe of Israeli War Crimes in Gaza, Says White House
"ICC warrants against Israel and Hamas will offer the West a choice: Either torpedo the international criminal justice project they have advanced since 1945 for good or hypocritically demand impunity for Israeli war crimes."
Apr 29, 2024
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on Monday reaffirmed the Biden administration's opposition to the International Criminal Court potentially issuing an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or other top officials related to Israel's war on the Gaza Strip.
"Would the U.S. or the White House see any potential arrests by the ICC as an aggravating factor in the negotiations?" one journalist asked about talks to end the bloodshed and free hostages.
Jean-Pierre responded: "So, we've been really clear about the ICC investigation. We do not support it. We don't believe that they have the jurisdiction. And I'm just gonna leave it there for now."
#WATCH | On International Criminal Court's (ICC) investigation into Israel's conduct in Gaza, White House press secretary Karine Jean Pierre says, "...We don't believe is in the ICC jurisdiction in this situation. We do not support the investigation. And I think that kind of… pic.twitter.com/du8NpEtLxj
— ANI (@ANI) April 29, 2024
Asked later about President Joe Biden's Sunday call with Netanyahu and whether the U.S. government is involved in any attempts to avert warrants from the Hague-based court, the press secretary echoed her previous comments.
The exchanges followed reporting that the Israeli government, in partnership with the U.S., is "making a concerted effort to head off" possible arrest warrants from the ICC targeting Netanyahu as well as Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi.
Citing two unnamed Israeli officials, Axiosreported that Netanyahu on Sunday asked Biden to help prevent the ICC from issuing warrants. A spokesperson for the White House National Security Council told the outlet that "as we have publicly said many times, the ICC has no jurisdiction in this situation and we do not support its investigation."
Neither Israel nor the United States is a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the treaty that established the tribunal, but Palestine accepted its jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed "in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem," in 2015.
The ICC formally launched its war crimes investigation in the occupied Palestinian territories in 2021, long before the IDF began its ongoing retaliation for the Hamas-led attack October 7 on Israel. The probe includes crimes going back to June 13, 2014.
Urging Biden "to intervene as part of the administration's ongoing commitment to Israel," U.S. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) on Monday declared that "it would be a fatal blow to the judicial and moral standing of ICC to pursue this path against Israel."
Mark Kersten, an assistant professor at the University of the Fraser Valley, responded: "Now a Democratic senator is threatening the ICC's very existence if it does what it was created to do: Impartially and independently investigate international crimes, without fear or favor. I hope this grotesque threat and atrocity-denialism is roundly condemned."
Also noting Fetterman's comments, Alonso Gurmendi, a lecturer in international relations at King's College London, said: "They really don't realize just how isolated Western governments are on this. Even among their own populations. This won't be a fatal blow to the ICC. It will relaunch its relationship with the global majority. Fighting this will only isolate and weaken the West further."
In January, the International Court of Justice found that Israel is "plausibly" engaged in genocide in Gaza. As of Monday, the Israeli bombardment and blockade had killed at least 34,488 Palestinians in the Hamas-governed strip, injured another 77,643, left thousands more missing in bombed-out communities, and displaced around 90% of the enclave's 2.3 million people.
Since October, the United States has ramped up its billions of dollars in military support for Israel. The Biden administration has been accused of being complicit in genocide in federal court. The next hearing in the case is scheduled for June.
Keep ReadingShow Less
To Remove 'Cloud of Doubt,' Journalism Professors Urge Review of NYT Story on Oct. 7 Sexual Violence
Nothing can "reverse the damage done to Palestine and to Palestinians," said the professors, "but the Times could still reverse some of the damage it has done to itself with its silence."
Apr 29, 2024
A front-page New York Times story that Israel used to galvanize public support for its U.S.-backed assault on Gaza must be subject to an independent review, said more than 50 journalism professors in a letter to the newspaper on Monday, as growing protests signified widespread outrage over the destruction that followed the bombshell article.
The professors, many of whom worked as full-time journalists before turning to academia, wrote to Timespublisher A.G. Sulzberger, executive editor Joe Kahn, and international editor Philip Pan, calling for a "thorough and independent review" into the article "'Screams Without Words': Sexual Violence on Oct. 7."
The letter urged the newspaper to form a commission made up of journalism experts to examine the "reporting, editing, and publishing processes" for the story.
The article came under scrutiny shortly after it was published, having been reported by not only international correspondent Jeffrey Gettleman but also two inexperienced freelancers based in Israel. One, Anat Schwartz, is a "former air force intelligence official" with whom the Times cut ties after it was revealed that she had "liked" a social media post calling for Gaza to be turned into a "slaughterhouse."
"It appears that extraordinary trust was invested in these individuals andthe Times would benefit from publicly explaining the circumstances that justified such unusual reliance on freelancers for such an important story," wrote the professors, including Mohamad Bazzi of New York University, Shahan Mufti of University of Richmond, and Jeff Cohen, who retired from Ithaca College.
Mufti joined Northwestern University assistant professor Steven Thrasher in gathering the signatures, and told The Washington Post that after "serious consideration and deliberation," the academics "came to the conclusion that this is necessary."
In addition to questions that have been raised about Schwartz's and Sella's experience and bias, the professors pointed to the newspaper's acknowledgment on March 26 that "new video evidence 'undercut' some important details" in "Screams Without Words," as well as Gettleman's comment suggesting he did not view the information in the story as hard "evidence."
"Can the paper 'establish' fact if its own reporter does not consider his information 'evidence'?" asked the professors.
In March, a spokesperson for Kibbutz Be'eri toldThe Intercept that victims of the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel were not sexually assaulted, and the family of one woman who was a key figure in "Screams Without Words" has denied the report's graphic details of sexual abuse were true.
The Intercept also reported that in reporting on the alleged sexual assaults, Schwartz relied on interviews with a rescue group that was "documented to have mishandled evidence and spread multiple false stories about the events of October 7, including debunked allegations of Hamas operatives beheading babies."
Al Jazeera journalist Laila Al-Arian called Monday's letter a "major development" and urged the Times to "do the right thing."
The methods used by Schwartz, The Interceptnoted earlier this month, were the building blocks for a story that "instantly served as a powerful reference in a mounting campaign waged by Israel and its supporters" to excuse Israel's assault on Gaza.
"The impact of The New York Times story is impossible to fathom," the professors wrote on Monday. "This is wartime and in the minds of many people, the Times' story fueled the fire at a pivotal moment when there might have been an opportunity to contain it before, as the International Court of Justice has ruled, the situation devolved into the 'plausible' realm of genocide. Considering these grave circumstances, we believe that the Times must waste no time in extending an invitation for an independent review."
The article, said one signatory, Sandy Tolan of the University of Southern California, was published "as the death toll mounted in Gaza, and criticism was beginning to focus more on Israel."
"Being cognizant of the potential damages of and consequences of the timing," Tolan told the Post, "given that it didn't appear to be as well-reported as it should have been, there's all the more reason why an external review is appropriate."
The signatories pointed out that there is significant precedent for newspapers conducting independent reviews of articles that have raised questions about bias and veracity.
"If an independent review finds that the Times did nothing gravely wrong, then it will be a win not just for the Times but for all journalism," the professors wrote. "In the worst case, if an investigation does find remarkable errors or negligence in the way the newsroom operated, nothing that the Times would do in response could ever reverse the damage done to Palestine and to Palestinians but the Times could still reverse some of the damage it has done to itself with its silence."
"Doing nothing, however," they added, "and allowing a cloud of doubt to hang over this historically consequential story will ensure that all the journalism that The New York Times produces in the course of this conflict will remain under a dark shadow."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Seven 'Incredible' Earth Defenders Honored With Goldman Environmental Prize
One winner said the award "signifies an international recognition that we are facing a new stage in humanity," one in which "human beings understand they are part of nature."
Apr 29, 2024
Activists who blocked fossil fuel development, protected vulnerable ecosystems, and helped enact clean air regulations are among the seven winners of this year's prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize.
The San Francisco-based Goldman Environmental Foundation announced Monday that the winners of the 35th annual Goldman Prize—which some call the "Green Nobels"—are:
- Marcel Gomes, Brazil: Gomes, a journalist , worked with colleagues at Repórter Brasil to coordinate "a complex, international campaign that directly linked beef from JBS, the world's largest meatpacking company, to illegal deforestation in Brazil's most threatened ecosystems."
- Murrawah Maroochy Johnson, Australia: Maroochy Johnson, a Wirdi woman from the Birri Gubba Nation, "blocked development of the Waratah coal mine," a "carbon bomb" that "would have accelerated climate change in Queensland, destroyed the nearly 20,000-acre Bimblebox Nature Refuge, added 1.58 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere over its lifetime, and threatened Indigenous rights and culture."
- Alok Shukla, India: Shukla "led a successful community campaign that saved 445,000 acres of biodiversity-rich forests from 21 planned coal mines in the central Indian state of Chhattisgarh."
- Andrea Vidaurre, United States: Vidaurre's "grassroots leadership persuaded the California Air Resources Board to adopt, in the spring of 2023, two historic transportation regulations that significantly limit trucking and rail emissions."
- Sinegugu Zukulu and Nonhle Mbuthuma, South Africa: Zukulu and Mbuthuma "stopped destructive seismic testing for oil and gas off South Africa's Eastern Cape" by "asserting the rights of the local community to protect their marine environment," safeguarding "migratory whales, dolphins, and other wildlife from the harmful effects of seismic testing."
- Teresa Vicente, Spain: Vicente "led a historic, grassroots campaign to save the Mar Menor ecosystem—Europe's largest saltwater lagoon—from collapse, resulting in the passage of a new law in September 2022 granting the lagoon unique legal rights."
Michael Sutton, executive director of the Goldman Environmental Foundation,
described the winners to The Associated Press as "an incredible group of individuals laboring, sometimes in obscurity, against overwhelming odds to prevail against governments, against industry."
Goldman Prize winners receive a $200,000 award and can apply for additional grants to fund their work.
Reacting to his win, Gomes said: "This award recognizes the impact that journalism can have to protect the environment and ultimately improve people's lives.Repórter Brasil was able to track the Brazilian meat chain from the farm to supermarkets abroad, which companies said was not possible to do."
Vicente told the AP that the prize "signifies an international recognition that we are facing a new stage in humanity," one in which "human beings understand they are part of nature."
Shukla toldThe New York Times that he hopes his award will inspire frontline communities around the world.
"There is a way," he said, "that local communities can actually resist even the most powerful corporations using just their resolve and peaceful, democratic means."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular