Leave a comment

Comments 8

hano January 17 2015, 11:16:43 UTC
iirc the Iranians also renamed the street outside the old British Embassy in Tehran 'Bobby Sands Avenue.' The FCO took it as proof that the Mullahs had a sense of humour. It took a while for them to accept that this was in fact a gesture of revolutionary solidarity.

Reply

andrewducker January 17 2015, 13:58:46 UTC
Yup - the article talks about the embassy knocking through into a different street so that they could change their address!

Reply


conuly January 17 2015, 17:14:51 UTC
Seriously, how did this go on for so long?

Because this is the Best Country on EarthTM and criticism of that is eeeeeeeevil.

Reply

randomdreams January 17 2015, 18:02:31 UTC
And, as they say, local and state governments make billions of dollars a year on it. (Which they then spend on ex-military hardware, in part.)

And as the article points out, there's still nothing to stop local and state police from continuing. Now the fed just doesn't help, which is a good start. Civil asset forfeiture is theft with no recourse.

Reply

resonant January 17 2015, 19:00:20 UTC
In Canada, the CBC has repeatedly warned us about this when traveling to corrupt countries such as the US.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/american-shakedown-police-won-t-charge-you-but-they-ll-grab-your-money-1.2760736

Reply

darkoshi January 17 2015, 20:06:53 UTC
I agree - I don't see anything in the article that says that you now have to be guilty of something to have property seized. It sounds like state and local police can continue to do so under state policies; only the federal program and its "sharing" provisions are being stopped. (Which at first confused me, because if the state now gets to keep 100% of the seized money rather than sharing it with federal agencies, how does that reduce the incentive for them to seize things?) But the article explains:
“Today, however, every state has either criminal or civil forfeiture laws, making the federal adoption process less necessary,” Holder’s statement said. “Indeed, adoptions currently constitute a very small slice of the federal asset forfeiture program ( ... )

Reply


don_fitch January 17 2015, 17:52:20 UTC
I'm not sure how it happened that this confiscation of property (under the "RICO" law) upon mere accusation went on for so long (and I'm sure it'll soon return when the Administration changes), but I'd guess that a significant majority of Americans are, nowadays, comfortable with governmental & police corruption, injustice, & authoritarianism. As, apparently, President Obama has been -- he could, in his first week in office, have told the AG -"Get rid of this injustice"-, but he didn't ( ... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up