The following story appeared originally on the IndyMedia site

Highlights of the highlights of S1510

For people who might go blind trying to rad the highlights of S1510. heres the short short version.

i just got done going thru the Senate's version of an anti-terrorism bill. Sorry i have not had time to go through the house version yet, they were incredibly long both of them. http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/s1510.html - senate http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c107:./temp/~c107tSoyiN - house

anyway here are the highlights of the higlights of the senate version. first of all, i have not read the text of that many bills, but the preamble type section of this one is unlike any other bill i have ever seen. it is basically indesctructible. it is worded so that no matter how much of it is struck down in court, or how many ways it is chalanged, the bulk of it will keep on going no matte what.

basically it seems ot be more or less precluding judicial review, except in the case of someone being wiling to just throw the whole thing out.

secondly, it appears to define as fair game for the intelligence community -that is for spying and surveillance and whatever- anything is fair game that might have a bearing on the conduct of the foreign affairs of the US. So basically that is already most anything, and as the whole globalization thing goes along it will get to be even more the case.

third, there is a very noticeable centralization to DC. i immediately thought of like an imperial capital, but that is just me. in several different places the bill specifies that certain court actions can ONLY be peformed in DC, no matter whether the people and issuesinvolved are at the opposite end of the country, and no matter whether local circuit courts are prefectly competent to deal with the issue. basiclly the DC circuit court would become sort of like the king of the federal circuits as far as i can see.

fourth, i just throw ths in because it is weird, they have a section expanding the range of information the government can gatehr about people, for example a lot more telecom info, but cable tv viewing habits are spcifically excluded. weird.

what else?.... o ya, it appears to authorize the governmentt o come into your house when yo are not home and look around and just do whatever I guess. As long as they dont take anything they dnt have to inform you in a timely fashion. maybe you'll get something in the mail in a few yars, "by the way we went through all your stuff while you were at work on 4 occassions in 2001."

so whats this....sixth, the congress- at least the senate- is blatantly just putting their heads up their asses, there ar elike about 5 or 6 provisions which basically say "go do whatever it is you're gong to do and don't tell us about it." theres a nice little provision that helps out the inteligence community by waiving the requirement for them to come in and explain what they are doing AT ALL until Feb 1 2002. so apparently between now and then the senate wouldn't know what was going on, and wouldnt want to kow what was going on.

7th, they have put in a very weak sunset clause, that is a clause that would make the laws automatically turn themselves off. all they have is a provision that in 5 years, they can vote to get rid of it, but if there is not the required amount in favor of getting rid of it. by contrast, they could have fixed so it disppaears unless it enjoys broad support, or they could have just let it die altogether and they could put togther a new one in 5 years if they thought hey still needed it.

8th, apparently they would like to encourage employers to put suspicions about possible criminal activity on the part of employees into personnel files, and to feel free to voce those suspicions to potential new employers the employees might go to. this seemed to apply to financial sector workers, but it wasnt entirely clear i dont think.

9th, he senate wants to have a standard technological system for the identification of peple entering the US.

10th there is a clause that as far as i can see allows the Attorney general to designate someone a terrorist and permanently bar them from entering the us, but get this wording - this detemination will be made on the attorney general's "sole UNREVIEWABLE discretion." so apparently even the supreme court is out of the loop on that one.

also the attorney general is actually order to hold foreigners suspected of being terrorists, indefintely, even if the courts have granted them relief from their detention. How do you like that? thats a big one.

Also the Senate voted- by 96-1 I think- they voted that Us attorneys should be able to fee free to engage in deciet and misrepresentation as long as they didnt actualy break federal laws. So apparently if you have a guy in custody you can tell him he's going to the electrict chair, you can tell him you have his whole family in custody, or you could tell the detainee that his family had been killed in an accident or a riot, you could tel him you were empowered to give out favors that you actually arent, the possibilities seem endless.

On a related note, if you are working for the governemtn ad you violate the rules and regulations of your position, any evidence you gather can still be used in court. you are still on the hook if you actually break the law, but the trend of all this just feels like "hey law enforcement just go do whatever you feel like you need to be doing, don't worry we won't ask questions."

..umm.. what else? o ya the grnad finale the definition of terrorism. As far as i can see you could potentially be classified as a terrorist for switching the letters around on a computer keyboard. Any "loss" of $5,000 or more that you cause to someones compute cn get you on the hook for terrorism under this bill. but loss is defined as literally almost anything. lost time on the computer, lost ability to use the computer, the cost of getting it fixed, the cost of putting on more security because you made someone feel insecure around their computer any and all of that and more can go towards th magic $5000 total. i think you could go intoa park ranges office and pour coca-cola on the computer and this would potentially get you into the terrorist basket.

another one that is pretty broad is arson or bombing of proprty used in interstate commerce. this sounds similar to a law they have out in i think oregon or washington state. A guy set fir to a car at a dealership when no one was around to protest the destruction of the environment and they sent him away for 20 years as a terrrist, despite no injuries, no prior record, no nothing. one strike and you're out.

..umm.. o one final, if you get put away from any kind of terrorism, even the coke on ranger smith's computer kind, you coul be in for a lifetime of surviellanc once you get ot of jail.a lifetime! that can be long time, especially if there is some guy giving you the eye every time you open a can of soda. i have heard the house version is slightly more sensible. we will see tho.

http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=73662&group=webcast< /A>