|
Artist and wife's dead body held by FBI under "Patriot Act"
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DaveSZ |
I feel safer already!
| quote: |
http://www.rtmark.com/CAEdefense/
May 25, 2004
FBI ABDUCTS ARTIST, SEIZES ART
Feds Unable to Distinguish Art from Bioterrorism
Grieving Artist Denied Access to Deceased Wife's Body
Steve Kurtz was already suffering from one tragedy when he called 911 early in the morning to tell them his wife had suffered a cardiac arrest and died in her sleep. The police arrived and, cranked up on the rhetoric of the "War on Terror," decided Kurtz's art supplies were actually bioterrorism weapons.
Thus began an Orwellian stream of events in which FBI agents abducted Kurtz without charges, sealed off his entire block, and confiscated his computers, manuscripts, art supplies... and even his wife's body.
Like the case of Brandon Mayfield, the Muslim lawyer from Portland imprisoned for two weeks on the flimsiest of false evidence, Kurtz's case amply demonstrates the dangers posed by the USA PATRIOT Act coupled with government-nurtured terrorism hysteria.
Kurtz's case is ongoing, and, on top of everything else, Kurtz is facing a mountain of legal fees. Donations to his legal defense can be made at http://www.rtmark.com/CAEdefense/
FEAR RUN AMOK
Steve Kurtz is Associate Professor in the Department of Art at the State University of New York's University at Buffalo, and a member of the internationally-acclaimed Critical Art Ensemble.
Kurtz's wife, Hope Kurtz, died in her sleep of cardiac arrest in the early morning hours of May 11. Police arrived, became suspicious of Kurtz's art supplies and called the FBI.
Within hours, FBI agents had "detained" Kurtz as a suspected bioterrorist and cordoned off the entire block around his house. (Kurtz walked away the next day on the advice of a lawyer, his "detention" having proved to be illegal.) Over the next few days, dozens of agents in hazmat suits, from a number of law enforcement agencies, sifted through Kurtz's work, analyzing it on-site and impounding computers, manuscripts, books, equipment, and even his wife's body for further analysis. Meanwhile, the Buffalo Health Department condemned his house as a health risk.
Kurtz, a member of the Critical Art Ensemble, makes art which addresses the politics of biotechnology. "Free Range Grains," CAE's latest project, included a mobile DNA extraction laboratory for testing food products for possible transgenic contamination. It was this equipment which triggered the Kafkaesque chain of events.
FBI field and laboratory tests have shown that Kurtz's equipment was not used for any illegal purpose. In fact, it is not even possible to use this equipment for the production or weaponization of dangerous germs. Furthermore, any person in the US may legally obtain and possess such equipment.
"Today, there is no legal way to stop huge corporations from putting genetically altered material in our food," said Defense Fund spokeswoman Carla Mendes. "Yet owning the equipment required to test for the presence of 'Frankenfood' will get you accused of 'terrorism.' You can be illegally detained by shadowy government agents, lose access to your home, work, and belongings, and find that your recently deceased spouse's body has been taken away for 'analysis.'"
Though Kurtz has finally been able to return to his home and recover his wife's body, the FBI has still not returned any of his equipment, computers or manuscripts, nor given any indication of when they will. The case remains open.
HELP URGENTLY NEEDED
A small fortune has already been spent on lawyers for Kurtz and other Critical Art Ensemble members. A defense fund has been established at http://www.rtmark.com/CAEdefense/ to help defray the legal costs which will continue to mount so long as the investigation continues. Donations go directly to the legal defense of Kurtz and other Critical Art Ensemble members. Should the funds raised exceed the cost of the legal defense, any remaining money will be used to help other artists in need.
For more information on the Critical Art Ensemble, please visit http://www.critical-art.net/
Articles about the case:
http://www.rtmark.com/CAEdefense/news-WKBW-2.html
http://www.rtmark.com/CAEdefense/news-WKBW.html
On advice of counsel, Steve Kurtz is unable to answer questions regarding his case. Please direct questions or comments to Carla Mendes .
|
|
|
|
| DR86 |
yeah watch out! I hear Crayola fingerpaint has some serious biotoxins in it!!!:rolleyes:
John Ashcroft is nothing but a stupid neo-fascist. |
|
|
| DaveSZ |
| quote: | Originally posted by DR86
John Ashcroft neo-fascist. |
Well certainly his pet legislation can be considered neo-fascist.
I don't like John Kerry much at all actually, but I think America will be dead if Ashcroft is on board for another Bush term.
http://www.austinchronicle.com/issu...ls_naked10.html
| quote: |
PATRIOT II: Be Very Afraid
Naked City
BY JORDAN SMITH
February 14, 2003:
On Feb. 7 the nonprofit Center for Public Integrity made public a draft of the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, written by the Dept. of Justice as a follow-up to 2001's USA PATRIOT Act. The new legislation would enhance the government's power to track information and people, restrict access to open records and restrain the judiciary -- a frightening enlargement of the PATRIOT Act's presumptive assault on civil liberties.
Although CPI also turned up a document showing the DSEA draft had already been sent to Vice-President Dick Cheney and House Speaker Dennis Hastert for review, DOJ Public Affairs Director Barbara Comstock backed away from that fact. The department's "staff has not presented any final proposals to either the attorney general or the White House," she said. "It would be premature to speculate on any future decisions, particularly ideas or proposals that are still being discussed at staff levels." Still, Comstock also sought to reassure the public that "the department's deliberations are always undertaken with the strongest commitment to our Constitution and civil liberties." That sounds great -- at least until you've read the proposed legislation.
Among the highlights: a broadening of wiretapping and electronic surveillance; creating a DNA database that would provide the feds with the power to take samples and maintain records on "suspected terrorists and other sources" and then use those samples to "detect, investigate, prosecute, or prevent terrorist activities or other unlawful activities"; and knocking away barriers -- including federal consent decrees -- that prevent local law enforcement agencies from spying on private groups or individuals. Conversely, the legislation proposes to restrict citizen access to government records. For example, the legislation would restrict public access to "worst case scenario" reports filed with the EPA under the Clean Air Act by companies and industries using dangerous chemicals. The feds say this info could provide a "roadmap" for terrorists.
The DOJ is seeking to do away with its responsibility to explain why certain information is so confidential that it must be kept out of open court proceedings. Currently, if federal prosecutors want to keep information confidential for an "in camera" inspection by a judge, they actually have to explain why in court. To the DOJ this is just too much: "As a result, the government is forced to divert valuable resources to litigating this question," a DOJ summary of the proposed act laments. Instead the DOJ is seeking to force judges to keep info out of court first, and only later decide if this action was in fact necessary.
For the full draft of the proposed legislation along with the DOJ summary and analysis, go to www.publicintegrity.org.
|
Ashcroft is still trying to pass more neo-fascist legislation incrementally through his surrogates in Congress:
http://www.austinchronicle.com/issu...ols_naked7.html
| quote: |
Naked City
Patriot II, Piece by Piece
BY JORDAN SMITH
Rep. Ron Paul, R-Surfside, calls the new law allowing financial snooping "outrageous and unacceptable."
While the so-called Patriot Act II -- a wish list of sweeping powers dreamed up last year by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft to augment 2001's USA PATRIOT Act -- disappeared shortly after a draft copy was made public early last year, it did not die. In fact, on Saturday, Dec. 13 -- as news of Saddam Hussein's capture drove the news cycle -- President George W. Bush signed into law a bill that will allow the federal government broad access to individuals' financial records without a court order. This allows the government to sidestep decades-old financial privacy laws, all in the name of preventing terrorism.
House Bill 2417, the Intelligence Authorization Act for fiscal year 2004, debuted in Congress last June, and was pushed back and forth between the House and Senate for nearly five months before finally making its way to Bush's desk on Dec. 2. The lengthy perennial bill authorizes appropriations for all intelligence-related activities and, on the whole, is fairly standard. However, the final bill was amended by the Senate to include a section that redefines and broadens the phrase "financial institution" -- an obscure yet sweeping change that, at least until challenged in court, will allow the federal government the ability to snoop into nearly every financial aspect of individuals' lives.
Previously, federal law enforcement officials could gain access to individuals' financial records from a bank only if those individuals were suspected of crimes and only after gaining the approval of a federal judge. But the new IAA not only allows the feds to snoop through financial records without a warrant and without demonstrating the person is actually a suspect in a crime, but also broadens the arena for snooping. The legal definition of "financial institution" previously referred only to banks. But now, the feds can examine financial records held by stockbrokers, car dealerships, casinos, credit card companies, insurance agents, jewelers, airlines, pawnbrokers, the U.S. Postal Service, and any other business "whose cash transactions have a high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax, or regulatory matters." Federal law enforcers need only draft a "National Security Letter" requesting the records in order to get them.
This change ultimately passed the U.S. House, but not before a handful of legislators -- including Texas Rep. Ron Paul, R-Surfside -- voiced stern opposition. "These expanded internal police powers will enable the FBI to demand transaction records from businesses ... without the approval or knowledge of a judge or grand jury," Paul said during a speech from the House floor on Nov. 20. "This was written into the bill at the 11th hour over the objections of members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which would normally have jurisdiction over the FBI. The Judiciary Committee was frozen out of the process. It appears we are witnessing a stealth enactment of the enormously unpopular 'Patriot II' legislation that was first leaked several months ago. Perhaps the national outcry when a draft of the Patriot II act was leaked has led its supporters to enact it one piece at a time in secret. Whatever the case, this is outrageous and unacceptable."
In the end Paul was one of 163 legislators (including fellow Texans Lloyd Doggett and Sheila Jackson Lee and presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich) to vote against the entire IAA solely because of the draconian amendment. "How this will take effect and what the limits of it are will probably be fought out in the courts," said Paul spokesman Jeff Deist. So far, Deist said, the IAA amendment is the first of the so-called Patriot II measures to make its way into legislation, but he expects it won't be the last. "January is a whole new ballgame," he said.
|
|
|
|
| DR86 |
| frankly another term of the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse(Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Cheney and Bush) scares me. |
|
|
| stevebutabi |
oh get the hell out of here... you drama queens.
america is facing a threat unlike any other that it has faced before.
how are you supposed to stop someone from putting a dirty bomb in their backpack, walking into times square, and setting it off thereby not only killing many people, but also sinking the world economy for a susbstantial period of time, thus causing worldwide suffering?
the answer is that you have to sacrifice some liberal rights to protect the country.
if .00000000000000001% of the population have to be detained so that the country can be safe, than so be it.
also, if there is another terrorist attack, what the do you think bush, kerry, or anyone else is going to do? that's right, more war in the arab world against 'innocent' regimes. do you want that? |
|
|
| DR86 |
yeah. the patriot act is really gonna help me be safe from the terrorists. did you know that most of the 9/11 hijackers were on terrorist watchlists and they were still allowed entry to this country?
the only thing that the patriot act does for me is it makes the authorities wary of my every move because i fit the "terrorist profile". you, the patriot act and john ashcroft can all go yourselves. |
|
|
| stevebutabi |
| quote: | | yeah. the patriot act is really gonna help me be safe from the terrorists. did you know that most of the 9/11 hijackers were on terrorist watchlists and they were still allowed entry to this country |
that's why we have to be more strict.
| quote: | | the only thing that the patriot act does for me is it makes the authorities wary of my every move because i fit the "terrorist profile". you, the patriot act and john ashcroft can all go yourselves. |
don't blame america, blame al-qaeda for forcing us to protect our country. |
|
|
| DR86 |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevebutabi
don't blame america, blame al-qaeda for forcing us to protect our country. |
i'm not blaming america, i'm blaming the politicians. and you shouldnt have to wait until thousands of people die to protect your country. if safety precautions had been taken in the first place, would 9/11 have happened? and before you say it, the patriot act is not an example of the safety precautions i'm talking about. |
|
|
| stevebutabi |
| quote: | | and you shouldnt have to wait until thousands of people die to protect your country |
yeah man that's why we're protecting it now... to stop another attack.
i mean, i understand what you have against the patriot act... it's not fair to profile people. however, the fact is that virtually everyone plotting to blow up america is either muslim or of arab decent. it is in the interest of america to keep tabs on such people and to step in when something suspicious is happening.
i wish we didn't have to take such measures, but we do.
also, i think that i can say on behalf of all americans that we care about our security more than we care about some people getting detained. sorry |
|
|
| DR86 |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevebutabi
i mean, i understand what you have against the patriot act... it's not fair to profile people. however, the fact is that virtually everyone plotting to blow up america is either muslim or of arab decent. it is in the interest of america to keep tabs on such people and to step in when something suspicious is happening.
|
well then I guess it's okay to keep tabs on such people as George Mitchell, Ralph Nader, Casey Casem, Doug Flutie and myself, becuase we're all of arab decent and could pose a threat to the US. right, how ignorant of me. |
|
|
| stevebutabi |
my bad, poor choice of words...
how about
people of arab nationality who come into the US, either by visa or nationalization
and yes, i do think we should keep a close tab on doug floutie |
|
|
| DR86 |
whatever man. i'm not going to argue with you about this, because it's obvious that you've accepted the patriot act will not see that it's an evil and harmful piece of legislation.
i consider this discussion over. |
|
|
|
|
