Ashcroft

Washington, 11 November 2004 (RFE/RL) -- No one questions Ashcroft's passion for protecting the American people. But many, including some members of his own Republican Party, believe he often went too far in the effort.

The focus of Ashcroft's legacy is the USA PATRIOT Act, a law passed only six weeks after the 11 September attacks. The measure -- which stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism -- gave law-enforcement authorities broad new tools to avert potential threats to the United States.

Despite these enhanced powers, Ashcroft was back before Congress less than two months after that law was enacted, seeking even greater powers. In a hearing on 6 December 2001, he spoke with characteristic conviction about what he called the need to act forcefully against groups such as Al-Qaeda.

"One option is to call 11 September a fluke, to believe it could never happen again, and to live in a dream world that requires us to do nothing differently," Ashcroft said. "The other option is to fight back, to summon all our strength and all of our resources and devote ourselves to better ways to identify, disrupt, and dismantle terrorist networks."

Ashcroft's supporters speak with similar conviction about his efforts to protect the country. One of them is Trent England, a legal policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, a private research center in Washington.

Yesterday Bush nominated his White House counsel Alberto Gonzales to succeed Ashcroft as attorney general. Gonzales was closely involved in helping draw up the rules for the Guantanamo Bay legal proceedings -- called "military commissions" -- for combatants captured in Afghanistan.

England told RFE/RL that Ashcroft's approach has been good for the simple reason that it has worked: "There's a lot of people trying to keep America safe, but John Ashcroft has certainly been one of the leaders there. We can all think back to the wake of [11 September]. I don't think that there were that many of us who really thought that we would go for 3 1/2 years after 11 September [2001] without another major terrorist attack. And the fact that we have [gone without a terrorist attack] shows that the Justice Department has been effective."

But Ashcroft's critics say his office has created an atmosphere of intolerance against Arabs and Muslims in the United States by paying so much attention to their activities as part of the war on terrorism.

England said the facts show this not to be the case: "I think that when you look at the response of the government to the 11 September attacks, you see an incredible amount of sensitivity to the concerns of Arab-Americans. Only in America, in the wake of something like 11 September, do you see the kind of really extreme sensitivity to make sure that, not only within the government but within the population as a whole, that people were not using those attacks as some kind of an excuse for racism."

England said Ashcroft's critics are merely trying to exaggerate the attorney general's political ardor in an effort to raise money for their own operations.

In fact, England said, Ashcroft has often set aside ideology to enforce the law fairly, as when he avidly pursued people suspected of mounting attacks on abortion clinics, even though Ashcroft is a devout opponent of abortion.

James Ross took a far different view. Ross, the senior legal adviser to the advocacy group Human Rights Watch in New York, said Ashcroft's tenure has represented a step backward, not forward, for civil liberties in the United States.

Ross said many restrictive elements of the USA PATRIOT Act should be revised. Of particular concern, he said, are memos from Ashcroft's office suggesting how forceful U.S. interrogators may be in questioning prisoners being held in Iraq and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

"Certainly, the role of the Justice Department in addressing such issues as torture is a real stain on the U.S. record. Where in the past the U.S. has been a leader in promoting respect for international law, [Ashcroft's] legacy and that of the administration may really be a real reversal," Ross said.

But Ashcroft's departure might offer no relief for civil libertarians. Yesterday Bush nominated his White House counsel Alberto Gonzales to succeed Ashcroft as attorney general. Gonzales was closely involved in helping draw up the rules for the Guantanamo Bay legal proceedings -- called "military commissions" -- for combatants captured in Afghanistan.

"Gonzales clearly had a clear role in instituting the military commissions," Ross said. "What [administration officials] did was basically scrap the Uniform Code of Military Justice -- the court-martial system -- and replace it with a system that doesn't recognize the [defendants'] most fundamental rights."

Those rights include those guaranteed under the Geneva Conventions. The Bush administration says the Geneva Conventions do not apply because the prisoners violated the international rules of war.

A U.S. federal court has stepped in on the first of these proceedings. It ruled that the commission prosecuting Osama bin Laden's driver, Salim Ahmed Hamdan, be halted so the defendant can have a hearing to determine whether he is a prisoner of war and therefore enjoys the protections of the Geneva Conventions

Philadelphia - December 14 - A federal appeals court denied an emergency appeal to stop prosecution of 11 Philadelphia-area Christians who allege the District Attorney's office retaliated against them for exercising their constitutional rights at a homosexual event in which they were arrested and later charged with felonies.

As WorldNetDaily reported, on Oct. 10, the group was "preaching God's Word" to a crowd of people attending the outdoor Philadelphia "OutFest" event and displaying banners with biblical messages.

Eight charges were filed, including three felonies and five misdemeanors. The charges were criminal conspiracy, possession of instruments of crime, reckless endangerment of another person, ethnic intimidation, riot, failure to disperse...

The next hearing date for the four adults is February 17. The trial date for 17-year-old Lauren Murch is February 18. Please keep these Christians in prayer, and for the judges and the officials who are working to actively repress Free Speech. They are facing Literally DECADES in PRISON (and you're next ...if the officials succeed)

Pray for the 4 Remaining in Jail: Evangelists lose ruling in protest at Gay Outfest (Tipping the balance through Hate-Crime Laws)

A judge refused to throw out the charges.

Philadelphia - A federal judge yesterday refused to block the local prosecution of 11 Christian evangelists arrested Oct. 10/04 in a confrontation at the "Outfest" gay-pride block party in Center City.

U.S. District Judge Petrese B. Tucker denied in a one-paragraph order the injunction requested last Friday by the American Family Association, a Mississippi-based conservative Christian "family values" group that is defending the 11.

American Family Association attorney Brian Fahling said he would file an emergency appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to reverse Tucker's ruling and block the prosecutions.

Preliminary hearings for 10 of those arrested are set for Tuesday in Philadelphia Municipal Court. A separate hearing for a juvenile arrested was set for today, but Fahling said it had been postponed.

Last Friday, Fahling argued that the arrests and prosecution of Repent America director Michael Marcavage and his fellow protesters violated their free-speech rights.

PHILADELPHIA (based on Reuters) - Feb 17/05 - A judge dismissed charges on Thursday against four anti-gay Christians accused of violating hate crime laws when protesting at a gay street festival, saying free speech rights allowed them to do so.

Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Pamela Dembe said the four members of "Repent America" exercised their right to free speech when they refused to move away from the city's gay pride "Outfest" last October.

The protesters used bullhorns and placards to warn festival participants that they would suffer eternal damnation for their homosexual behavior. After a noisy, nonviolent confrontation with gay people, they were charged with incitement to riot, and violating a 1982 Pennsylvania law that bars inciting hatred on the basis of race, color, religion, nationality or sexuality [Sexual Orientation].

"You cannot stifle free speech because you don't want to hear it," Dembe said. "Many of these messages may be repulsive and offensive but people are allowed to make them.

Assistant District Attorney Charles Ehrlich said after the ruling that free speech was not the most important issue in the case. The defendants had been charged because of their disruption of the gay event and for their conduct, not because of their statements, he said. Ehrlich said he would decide within 30 days whether to appeal.

The other defendants were Dennis Green, 38, of Petersburg, Virginia; James Cruise, 53, of Richmond, Virginia; and Mark Diener, 33, of Philadelphia. Eleven protesters were initially charged but charges were dropped against six. After the ruling, charges against the remaining defendant, a 17-year-old, will be dropped, defense attorney Scott Shields said.