Previous Month22023Next Month
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28        

  Submit An Event


What WE Can Do
The Purpose Lounge
Purpose Lounge Media Guide
Bed-Stuy Community Coalition
Bed-Stuy Strategy Lounge
Standing on the Shoulders of Giants
Digital Direct Action
Real University News
Veterans For Peace
Shadows of the Octopus
Latino Corner
Cynthia McKinney Perspective
The Eminent Domain Report
sexual harassment int. team
Burning the Closet
Miss Oats Health Notes
Impact Unit Community Works
Campaign Support Team



[BANNED VIDEO REPORT] N.J. Senator Menendez's Office Responds to URNEKST about Habeas Corpus

[BANNED VIDEO REPORT] In Fall 2006, s6k:Investigates embarked on a project to demand that our public servants supply unambiguous answers to unambiguous questions. This led us to ascertain what the law was for such an effort. We decided that making calls to their offices, which we are often prompted to do, and recording the calls would be the most accurate way to have a statement from a public official that couldn't be taken out of context.

That effort was thwarted by Google banning the two videos that derived from the investigation. Our specific goal was to have clear answers of the public positions of Senators Menendez and Lautenberg on waterboarding, though other issues were discussed. They were banned April 2009. We have no idea who made the complaint.

The Military Commissions Act was the predicate to illegal practices under U.S and International Law, which they both endorsed the policy by voting yes, in the name of their constituents. With this understanding, we believed we had the civil and legal right to ascertain and publish the conversations regarding this issue.

Below are the statues for New York and New Jersey, the states in question.

- New Jersey
N.J. Stat. 2A:156A-3: Interception of any wire, electronic or oral communication, or disclosure of the contents of such communication by someone having reason to know of the interception, is a crime. The disclosure of intercepted information is not a crime, however, if the contents of the communication have "become public knowledge or public information."

In addition, an interception is legal if the interceptor is a party to the communication, or one of the parties has given prior consent, so long as no criminal or tortious intent is present.Nonetheless, even if a person is a subscriber to a particular telephone, that person cannot consent to the recording of conversations on that telephone to which he is not a party.

- New York
N.Y Penal Law 250.00,250.05: It is a Class E felony to overhear or record a telephonic or telegraphic communication if one is not the sender or receiver, or does not have the consent of either the sender or receiver. It also is a crime for someone to overhear or record any conversation or discussion without the consent of at least one party to that conversation.

In both instances, we adhere to the letter and spirit of the law. What we asked was public information from a public official, which is the property of the public. We asked for no secret information and disclosed no classified information.

It is fundamentally wrong and unfair that Google Video decided to ban these videos.

the original story

The ongoing problem of the U.S. allowing people from around the world [including from within the U.S.] to be disappeared and tortured while having no proof of guilt is a problem everyone should understand the importance of. In this phone call, URNEKST put his questions on this topic to Sen. Menendez's staffer. Although we understand staffers can do nothing but quote statements given to them, it's still important to add another voice and message to Sen. Menendez, especially since he voted for the Military Commissions Act.

play video here
click here for a large screen view of
this installment of WIRETAP digg NewsVine YahooMyWeb Furl Fark Spurl TailRank Ma.gnolia blogmarks co.mments Reddit


 a Third Wave Production ©2005   |contact us