Time Mpls did the same. The Patriot Act, and the devious Bush bandits'
anti-democratic motives behind it, need to be resoundingly rejected at
EVERY level of government. Besides the national Act, there is a Minnesota
version. Reject both.

Time to say No. Stop this lawlessness NOW.

This is city business. More important than the potholes that timid souls
and defenders of the powers that be would have us piddle our time away on
-- while Bush turns up the flames on the pot of water we live in. Speak
now, or forever forget our peace.

Big money has bought the presidency and the national congress. Silenced
there, we have to speak out and act and legislate where we can. Cities
have more freedom than the "higher" levels of govt; we have begin here.

--David Shove
Roseville

------

City Council votes 7-1 against USA Patriot Act
Oakland, spurred by fears of civil rights violations, is largest U.S.
municipality to criticize law

http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,82%7E1726%7E1061918,00.html

By Cecily Burt , STAFF WRITER

OAKLAND -- It took until past midnight to do it, but the Oakland City
Council stood up against the USA Patriot Act over fears the new federal
law would be used to violate residents' civil liberties guaranteed under
the U. S. Constitution.

By a 7-1 vote, the council -- with outgoing Councilmember Dick Spees the
lone dissenter -- approved a resolution opposing the act and other
executive orders that expand the government's ability to obtain personal
information and infiltrate religious and political organizations, under
the auspices of the war against terrorism.

Oakland becomes the 19th and largest city in the country to formally
oppose the act, and many others are considering similar motions.
Councilmember Nancy Nadel (Downtown-West Oakland) and Council President
Ignacio De La Fuente (San Antonio-Fruitvale) sponsored the resolution,
which was crafted by the Oakland Civil Rights Defense Committee.

The city's resolution speaks to Oakland's diversity. Seventy percent of
city residents are people of color and 60 percent are immigrant, U.S.
Census figures show. Many could suffer disproportionately under laws that
target Muslims and people of Middle Eastern and South Asian descent,
opponents fear.

According to the American Civil Liberties Union, the language of the USA
Patriot Act and other executive orders could encourage racial profiling,
hate crimes and unreasonable searches and seizures.

Oakland's resolution asks city staff, to the extent legally possible, to
refrain from assisting or voluntarily cooperating with "investigations,
interrogations or arrest procedures, public or clandestine, that are in
violation of individuals' civil rights or civil liberties ..."

Judy Haney, coordinator of Oakland's Civil Rights Defense Committee,
rallied with other Oakland residents in front of City Hall before the
meeting Tuesday night. The hardy bunch also stayed past midnight to speak
in support of the resolution and applaud the council when the vote was
finally taken.

Many said it made them proud to say they were from Oakland.

"There is strong, considered support in Oakland (for this resolution),"
Haney said. "People do not need to exchange civil liberties for security.

"The Patriot Act really does bring back the memories of Japanese
internment camps, and the ghost of Joe McCarthy, and that sense of always
looking over our shoulders for COINTELPRO," Haney said. "We've already
said those things don't work, why do them again?"

Zoia Horn, an 84-year-old retired librarian who rallied outside City Hall,
was jailed for three weeks 30 years ago after refusing to testify at
trials of Vietnam War protesters.

She believed then, and now, that the First Amendment gives people the
right to speak their minds and criticize the government.

The Oakland Public Library Commission is apparently carrying on Horn's
tradition: It has also passed a resolution opposing the act.

Nadel said it was important that Oakland become "part of a national,
organized effort to wake up our federal legislators that they have signed
away some fundamental constitutional rights that we are not willing to
give up."

"Can you imagine hesitating before you take a book out of the library?"
Nadel said. "It's important because a lot of national actions will have
some pretty egregious effects on our citizens."

Spees said he supports civil liberties, but he felt that some language was
too strong and offered no proof new federal laws were specifically
targeting Muslims and other groups. He provided substitute language for
the resolution, but got no takers.
_______________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to