Rating: 
Summary: The War on Dissent becomes official
Review: According to the author of this book, at least 104 people were still being held in INS custody as of May 2002. Back in November 2001 the total may have been around 2000. They are all of Middle Eastern or South Asian descent. They were brought to the attention of the authorities soley because of their ethnicity and then held incommunicado on immigration charges. Reverend Ashcroft had granted powers to the INS to detain immigrants 48 hours without charges. The government has not been able to discover that any of these post-Sept 11 detainees have any connection to terrorism. The author points out that a disproportionate number of cases of the 718 of which anyone has been able to find anything about, have featured much longer detainment than 48 hours before being charged with their immigration infractions. One man was held 118 days. The author notes in that in four decisions, judges ruled against Patriot act provisions including the effort to close immigrations hearings to the public of detainees of "special interest" and relating to the efforts of the government to block access to the outside world for the detainees and to not release the names and other info about the detainees. It is rather extraordinary, it is noted, for the judiciary to challenge the government in a time of national crises. One judge ruled against the government's use of the material witness statute to imprison witnesses for grand jury testimony. The case of Osama Owadallah was under review in that case. He was repeatedly assaulted, the author writes, by prison gaurds while he was in prison for three weeks. The author notes some other stories. A Pakistani man was beaten by inmates as prison gaurds stood by after a newspaper article circulated in the prison that he was suspected of terrorism. Another, the plaintiff in Turkmen Vs. Ashcroft, complained of his face being kicked and slammed into walls by prison gaurds, loosening his lower teeth. He was in a great deal of pain but not allowed to see a dentist. A Pakistani man, was detained after a pastor at a local church pointed him out to the FBI and he had only overstayed his visitors visa. He had agreed to leave the U.S. but had to stay at a correctional center while the FBI completely cleared him of links to terrorism. In the meantime he died of a heart attack. An Iranian suffered a stroke and spent three months in solitary confinement but got no treatment. In general these poor immigrants have been heavily shackled and forced to stay in windowless rooms with bright light on 24 hours a day. The author is particularly concerned about the new crime of "domestic terrorism" delineated in the "Patriot Act." Terrorism is no longer defined just as the use of violence against civillians for political ends. Domestic terrorism is defined as using force or coercion to intimidate the U.S. government. The author is certain that civil disobedience or any sort of confrontational protest will fall under "domestic terrorism. Combined with the enhanced powers of surveilance granted in the Patriot act and Ashcroft's very permissive guidelines issued on May 30 2002 for domestic intelligence, the other worries that Cointelpro-type activities are receiving official sanction. Under Ashcroft's guidelines, the author notes, relatively little restraints are placed on FBI infiltration and disruption of groups whose only crime is opposing the government. The author goes through some cases of such activities already known to be in existence such as the Denver Police department's "spy files" on peaceful organizations and their members. Of particular interest, is the author noting that Bush (or rather Cheney and the rest of his advisors for Bush doesn't know what he's doing) in November 2001 vetoed the release of records from the Reagan administration that were supposed to have been released on January 20 2001. He signed an executive order essentially overiding the Presidential records act of 1978 that called for the release of records from a presidential administration twelve years after it leaves office. The order gave sitting presidents and former presidents and vice presidents the right to veto the release of past records. Bush's executive order essentiallty overrode the Presidential Records act. The president made a law to replace a law of congress, which is unconstitutional. Such are the notions of accountable constitutional government in the present administration of "conservatives." If you are a pure-hearted American who cannot comprehend the notion that your leaders might have something other than your best interests at heart as they supposedly strive to protect you from Bin Laden, then this book might be too much for you. But if you are sceptical of the dominant institutions in this country, and are aware of the many abysmal episodes with civil liberties in this country's history, then read this book.
Rating:
Summary: silence
Review: i only got to say a couple things... u want honesty and truth? get this book, thats the bottom line_
Rating:
Summary: Steven King Doesn't Have Anything On This
Review: If you're in the mood for a good scare, this will do you. It's amazing how fragile our liberties are, and how one little decision can place them in harm's way. I definantly recommend this, regardless of the current climates, for a better understanding of the ways our liberties have been abused in the past, and how easily our privacy can be invaded without our even knowing.
Rating:
Summary: America Drifts to Fascism
Review: In this brief and lucid book, Nancy Chang exposes how the USA Patriot Act and other post September 11th responses by the Bush regime constitute a flagrant assault on American civil liberties and constitutional rights. Chang places her findings in a sharp historical context by providing a brief survey of similar events in American history, including the jailing and detention of innocent people as far back as the immediate aftermath of the Revolutionary War. Chang concludes that while the Bush regime's purported anti-terrorist measures definitely provide it with a variety of legal pretexts to persecute American citizens and non-citizens at will, (for example, the authoring of this review could constitute a threat to public safety under several of the USA Patriot Act's broad definitions of "domestic terrorism") it does little or nothing to actually protect people living in the United States from terrorist attacks. Perhaps the most disturbing part of Chang's study is its revelation that America's theocratic Attorney General, John Ashcroft has detained hundreds of Arabs and South Asians living in America for minor immigration violations. These individuals have frequently been incarcerated under highly abusive conditions and some have died in custody. Ashcroft's goal, according to Chang, is to use immigration violations as a sweeping drag net for capturing any foreign terrorists who, like many of the September 11th suicide bombers, may have violated their visa requirements. Even if one is willing to turn a blind eye to the fate of the hundreds of innocent immigrants who have already suffered under this policy, one cannot ignore its broader consequences for the American people. History has shown that in places like Stalinist Russia, Nazi Germany, and earlier situations in America, providing the government with broad, unaccountable authority generally results in global not local patterns of abuse. A government that is interested in persecuting immigrants today may go after anyone else it doesn't like tomorrow. And even if Ashcroft succeeds in rooting out all terrorists who have visa problems, this will not protect America from the likes of Timothy McVeigh. Finally, Ashcroft's policy just doesn't add up when you consider Chang's stunning revelation that the Bush administration used provisions of the USA Patriot act to quash a congressional investigation into the fact that in early 2001, the INS extended the visas of two of the September 11th terrorists including the alleged ring leader, Mohamed Atta. That's right, despite the fact that these guys were on terrorist watch lists, our government provided them with the legal means to remain in this country, but George W. Bush says that in order to protect us he can't let our elected officials publicly examine how our government could make such a catastrophic error. It seems that with these new anti terrorist measures, the government isn't interested in protecting us so much as expanding its own power and eliminating any accountability. My only complaint about this book is that it is written and structured like a tedious legal brief, which is understandable since Chang is a veteran litigation attorney. Despite this minor peccadillo, "Silencing Political Dissent" is an important book that should be read by all U.S. citizens and non-citizens.
Rating:
Summary: Crucial Booklet Outlines Our Situation
Review: Nancy Chang of the Center For Constitutional Rights has prepared a concise summary and analysis of the USA PATRIOT Act and other initiatives that follow the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. This is crucial background material for any debate on the measures taken by the Bush Administration in response to terror. In addition, Chang has placed the USA PATRIOT Act in a historical context, reminding of us other cases in which our Republic has suspended common sense along with our democratic principles as a response to fear. It is important to understand that Attorney General John Ashcroft did not invent preventive detention, and that George W. Bush is not the first president to resent elements of the Constitution he is charged to defend. Dispassionately and tersely, Chang exposes the articles of the USA PATRIOT Act, the number of detainees and the treatment of non-citizens, the quest for authority to snoop on innocents and gather information on law-abiding citizens, the monitoring of conversations between client and attorney, the use of patriotism to demonize dissidents, and the unquestionable grab for power by the executive branch. The book is high on information, including good documentary footnotes and solid research; and low on rhetoric. This enhances its credibility and its strength in a time of confusion.
Rating:
Summary: Crucial Booklet Outlines Our Situation
Review: Nancy Chang of the Center For Constitutional Rights has prepared a concise summary and analysis of the USA PATRIOT Act and other initiatives that follow the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. This is crucial background material for any debate on the measures taken by the Bush Administration in response to terror. In addition, Chang has placed the USA PATRIOT Act in a historical context, reminding of us other cases in which our Republic has suspended common sense along with our democratic principles as a response to fear. It is important to understand that Attorney General John Ashcroft did not invent preventive detention, and that George W. Bush is not the first president to resent elements of the Constitution he is charged to defend. Dispassionately and tersely, Chang exposes the articles of the USA PATRIOT Act, the number of detainees and the treatment of non-citizens, the quest for authority to snoop on innocents and gather information on law-abiding citizens, the monitoring of conversations between client and attorney, the use of patriotism to demonize dissidents, and the unquestionable grab for power by the executive branch. The book is high on information, including good documentary footnotes and solid research; and low on rhetoric. This enhances its credibility and its strength in a time of confusion.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent concise summary
Review: Nancy Chang's concise summary of post 9/11 developments is an excellent primer on how dissent has been repressed and silenced in the name of anti-terrorism and how "patriotism" has been twisted into something resembling a Mccarthyite witch-hunt. She focuses on the USA PATRIOT Act, and her legal analysis of the profound unconstitutionality of some of its provisions is chilling. Her legal analysis is acute and accurate (she is the senior litigation lawyer with the Center for Constitutional Rights in NYC). Among other things, attorney-client communications are now being monitored if the client is suspected or accused of "terrorist" activities. The term "terrorism" has been so expanded and amplified by this Act as to make it applicable to many activities not normally considered to be within its ambit, as Ms. Chang details. This is a timely, up-to-the-minute introduction, and urgent reading for everyone concerned with the assault on civil rights now taking place in the guise of fighting "terrorism."
Rating:
Summary: Implications of the Patriotic Act
Review: Nancy Chang's Silencing Political Dissent is a brilliant look into US history and current political agendas. Through her analysis of the Patriot Act , Chang is able to suggest to the reader the ways in which the newly militarized government is attempting to gain more power and less accountability through silencing the public and being secretive. The Patriot Act takes away constitutional rights and makes the fourth amendment null and void. This book allows the reader to look at the current "war on terror" in comparison to some historical events. Chang conveys the importance of this act by allowing the reader to imagine the implications that rightful protest could be considered terrorism and a person could be denied due process because of race, religion, or ethnicity. Most importantly, this book outlines the many steps that have been taken to deny rights to people showing a disregard for democracy and all that our country stands for.
Rating:
Summary: An Awareness Course for the Citizen
Review: The author approaches her subject in somewhat technical legal terms, but it is straightforward enough that anyone can understand the implications as Nancy Chang offers clear insight into the dismantling of our Constitutional Rights. With the author's keen perception and understanding, she is able to take you through the most controversial changes in the new post 9-11 legislation, and allow you to see how easily the Patriot Act *could be abused* to turn rightful protest to fit the crime of 'terrorism'. The book investigates how these new laws give our new 'militarized' government unprecedented new powers NEVER INTENDED by our founding fathers, and how the current Bush/Ashcroft administration is bunkering itself behind a cloak of secrecy in which information is becoming increasingly more and more difficult to obtain by the public, and even by Congress itself. The idea that the government can simply put a certain 'label' on a person, thereby circumventing the normal due process of law should be revolting to all, not to mention that it's un-American and defies the protection guaranteed in the Bill of Rights for ALL, regardless of race, religion or ethic background. It is likely that many of you believe these changes don't affect you as individuals. Don't kid yourself partner. You ARE already affected and it is clear that America itself, and the founding principles upon which it supposedly stands for, are the real losers in all of this. Since trying to read the Patriot Act itself would be an excercise in futility. I suggest you pick up this very useful book.
Rating:
Summary: Status Report
Review: Though this little booklet may soon be overtaken by events, it�s a fine reality check for where we are at the moment. As Chang makes clear, Patriot Act I renders the Fourth Amendment meaningless, at the same time it strips non-citizens of due process and constitutional guarantees. And though the text does at times read like a legal brief, the details are provided in succinct fashion that should alarm anyone concerned with safeguards against tyranny, whatever the source. Moreover, the threat promises to worsen as Ashcroft readies a sequel to PAI, further blurring the line between dissent and terrorism. Despite appearances, this is not a partisan issue. We all stand to lose unless we stand up for constitutional government and the right to dissent. Chang�s represents a handy and inexpensive status report, that should be the duty of every citizen to read and act on.
| 
