Good Virtual Fences Keep out Virtuous Neighbors

Watched some of the debate on the enabling of detainee trials and unwarranted surveillance. The highlight of it was the debate in the House Judiciary Committee on the detainee bill and the vote whether to recommend the bill "favorably". Some of the House Republicans got the wrong message and thought they were able to vote their consciences and the vote was to report the bill "unfavorably" (this was later reversed, off-camera).

The debate on the detainee bill in both houses was around whether to give the Bushites 80% of what they wanted or 70%, the 10% being a provision that prohibits appeals to "habeas corpus" by those detainees who are not American persons. This one is certain to go to the Supreme Court and be decided by a 5-4 margin, one way or the other. One would have to think that it will be struck down eventually, which suggests a way the detainees may gradually have their day to have their cases come forward.

The point I didn't hear in the debate was the fact that "habeas corpus" would have to come, not from the detainee himself, but from some other party who gives a hoot about the fact the government is holding an individual. Gradually, then, the names of detainees would enter the US, people who might be looking for them (or their representatives in organizations like Amnesty International) would bring suit and then the government would need to present some evidence that the person is held for some valid reason. This will require the captors to expend a lot more energy than they do now in substantiating the captivity of many of those who have been simply dumped their and forgotten, and that will address the sin that the whole Guantanamo fiasco represents to most of the world.

As far as electronic surveillance goes, the idea that people actually think no Big Brother can listen to them seems absurd to us all these days. Instead, the assumption we all share is that someone could be listening, if they wanted, and you better watch what you say when it comes to certain issues. The question of whether someone gets a secret warrant on a routine basis is not central, except to the surveillance organizations who have to process the paper.

The final travesty of this session of this insubstantial Congress is the issue of the Stupid Border Fence. Apparently Congress had a little trouble signing onto the "stupid" part; they're looking for something that's mostly really "smart" with a relatively small "stupid" component. It probably doesn't matter, anyway, since they didn't appropriate the money to build anything--it's the intention to build a smart wall that matters?

Pity. I thought maybe they had something with the idea of a huge masonry wall, built by thousands of Mexican immigrants, which would thus drive up the cost of labor of the Mexican immigrant construction workers throughout this region and thus improve even more the rising value of already completed construction (i.e., my home). I certainly didn't think this had anything to do with the number of illegal immigrants coming into the country: most immigrants have come, and will continue to come, through legal channels, and then they just overstay their visas or ignore their visas' limitations on activity.

There is a humanitarian argument, though, for a smart border watch system which uses a variety of methods, particularly well-placed lights and cameras, to alert the border police and help them detain those sneaking in. The bill will be well-implemented if it does something to disrupt the coyote industry--the people who make a living arranging for people to cross the border in unsafe ways, often arranging to rob the migrants themselves. Many people are getting killed trying to come in.

Plus, there's so many jobs to be gained looking at cameras! Perhaps we could train people to do this at their homes, through the Internet?