Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

whereaminow (73.77)

What Liberties Have You Lost? Ask 16 Year Old Ashton Lundeby

Recs

22

May 06, 2009 – Comments (36)

During the Bush years, Republicans who listen to Savage, Limbaugh and Hannity would frequently ask me in a condescending I-know-better-than-you-attitude, "What liberties have you lost?" Then I'd tell them about Habeus Corpus and they'd hurl contempt at me as if how dare I presume to understand such complex issues like terrorism and the sacrifices we must make to defeat it.  Seriously.   

Now it's the Democrats' turn. With every economic freedom-crushing bill forced down our throats they ask me "What liberties have you lost?"  I tell them about basic economic principles, the views of the Church, economic calculation problems, social justice initiatives that only excarbate the problem, the expansion of the State through government spending and inflation, how this expansion enables people like GWB to come along and pass horrible socially destructive policies (do you really think Democrats will be in charge forever?)

"If you don't like it, stay in Qatar." 

Well, I don't like it. 

And neither does sixteen year old Ashton Lundeby, held in FEDERAL PRISON in Indiana for the past 60 days without a charge being filed against him.  That's right.  Our beloved federal government is holding a sixteen year old boy in FEDERAL PRISON without a charge.  There is a complaint against him, but no charge.  And why is there no charge?  Because there is no evidence, silly. 

No what did this barely-pubescent threat to humanity and scourge of the Earth do to get such Soviet-style treatment in America?  According the Federal Bureau of Illiterates (FBI), a bomb threat was made at 10:05 pm from an IP address registered to his computer.  That's it.  No, really, THAT'S IT.  There is no other evidence.  There is no bomb making material.  There are no bomb making booklets or Columbine-esque homemade videotapes.  There is no other evidence.

What about Ashton?  Well, let's see. He was at Union Chapel Methodist Church in Kittrell, North Carolina with his mother until 9 pm, and then they went grocery shopping until 10pm.  That gives him 5 minutes to make a bomb threat upon returning home from Church. Maybe he really didn't like the sermon!

Oh, did I mention that Ashton is homeschooled?  Those of you unfamiliar with the Government's war on homeschoolers should take a read of The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America.  What about hackers?  Ashton's neighborhood pals say they can identify a hacker that has caused trouble in their school, and that he may have targeted Ashton.  Did the FBI follow up on this lead? Of course not.

What if the FBI is right?  What if this young man did make a bomb threat?  Is that the punishment we dish out these days?  60 days of incarceration in federal prison without a charge being laid against him?

THIS IS OUR GOVERNEMNT?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So under what law is the government holding this sixteen year old terrorist mastermind behind bars in a federal prison without charges for sixty days?  The PATRIOT ACT.

God Bless America

Land That I Love

Stand Beside Her

And Guide Her

To The Homes Of The Boys That I Love

I will say no more, lest the FBI come after me.

David in Qatar

36 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On May 06, 2009 at 4:57 AM, whereaminow (73.77) wrote:

"This isn't America – not the America I knew, the one I grew up in," Ashton's mother told Pro Libertate. "This is like something out of a Third World dictatorship where the people in power just do whatever they want to anybody they choose. I want my son back, and I'll do anything I can to free him. But people need to know that if this isn't stopped now, any of us at anytime can be treated the same way. The next time it will be your house they visit in the middle of the night, and your children they take away."

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#2) On May 06, 2009 at 4:58 AM, DaretothREdux (48.12) wrote:

I had a friend who had everything going right in his life. He just graduated from law school and got a job as a public defender. He just bought himself a brand new house. He used to be right beside me talking to people about the evils of our gov't. He is the one who told me about Naomi Wolff's book, but after Obama was elected he sort of jumped off the band wagon and decided that things could be alot worse...until Obama started attacking civil liberties again!

See to me the economic problems were just as bad as the civil liberties, but to him the rights of the people is apparently much higher on the list.

Needless to say he is about to start a Libertarian meetup group in his new town, and I am about to give him a call and tell him about this kid's story.

Keep up the fight David!

Report this comment
#3) On May 06, 2009 at 5:23 AM, whereaminow (73.77) wrote:

Try searching for this kid on the Internet.  The major media hasn't even caught wind of the story yet.  And they wonder why the newspapers are dying.

WRAL TV in Raleigh, NC

World News Daily

DaretothREdux,

Thanks dude. I don't really want to fight these animals. I'd rather they just leave government service and try doing something productive with their lives. Unfortunately, 99% of America voted for the continuation of the Patriot Act. (Yes, you can! You voted for Obama even though you knew he wouldn't repeal it. Awesome!)

David in Qatar 

Report this comment
#4) On May 06, 2009 at 5:34 AM, DaretothREdux (48.12) wrote:

My father works in the local media. He will be getting a call this morning. I don't know if they will cover the story, but it wont hurt to ask.

Report this comment
#5) On May 06, 2009 at 5:45 AM, whereaminow (73.77) wrote:

We can't save everyone, but if you can save one innocent person in your life, then you will have made a world of difference.

I want to help this kid. Even if he did place the bomb threat (which I doubt, since there is no charge), this is unjust and indefensible.  If there is a donation drive for his defense team, count me in.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#6) On May 06, 2009 at 5:52 AM, DaretothREdux (48.12) wrote:

BTW I searched for the kid's name and your blog is the 8th link. I already texted everyone I think will care...even though they are all asleep since it's only approaching 6am here.

What scares me the most is that perhaps for everyone of the kids like this that we do hear about there may be ten others who we don't hear about...

Report this comment
#7) On May 06, 2009 at 5:58 AM, whereaminow (73.77) wrote:

 “if public opinion is not unduly aroused one may safely set aside the Constitution and illegally arrest one’s enemies.” - Gore Vidal, Burr

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#8) On May 06, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Varchild2008 (84.44) wrote:

We haven't lost habeus corpus.  Never happened under President Bush.  But, liberals continue to paint this false NEW WORLD ORDER fantasy where the United States Constitution applies to the entire WORLD.

I guess citizenship really does mean NOTHING to liberals.
Citizenship is meaningless and anyone that disagrees is somehow stealing freedoms away from foreign terrorists that plot mass murder on our soldiers overseas or on Americans here at home.

Cries of anger over America not giving habeus corpus to foreign terrorists does not make any sense at all to me.  You can't fight a bloody war if you have to flood the Courts with lawyers for every single terrorist or foreign combatant that you wounded and captured in the battlefield.  Its just not feasible and even if it was... You'd be asking for an awful lot of Terrorists to return to the battlefield to kill more of us due to some court technicality.

The United States Constitution thankfully applies to just AMERICANS... and AMERICAN CITIZENS to be more percise... Not some 2-bit terrorist in Zimbabwe.

Report this comment
#9) On May 06, 2009 at 8:52 AM, whereaminow (73.77) wrote:

Varchild2008,

Read the story. The kid is American.  And definitely not a terrorist.

David in Qatar 

Report this comment
#10) On May 06, 2009 at 8:53 AM, ronb111 (72.93) wrote:

Welcome to the brave new world order. The present and past adminitrations have a complete disregard for our Constitution and Bill of Rights. It seems that most of these people have not been outside of the U.S. for a prolong period of time and do not realise that other nations want us taken down as we pose a threat to the  world order.

Report this comment
#11) On May 06, 2009 at 9:20 AM, PrestonCheek (35.57) wrote:

It's going to get worse guys, a lot worse.

Good work.

Report this comment
#12) On May 06, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Gemini846 (89.88) wrote:

It seems that most of these people have not been outside of the U.S. for a prolong period of time and do not realise that other nations want us taken down as we pose a threat to the  world order.

Sadly this is the argument that the Neo-cons use to get things like the Patriot act passed in the first place.

IP Address chasing on a dynamic DNS server is about as retarded as it gets.

Report this comment
#13) On May 06, 2009 at 9:27 AM, devoish (98.76) wrote:

David,

If it turns out the mom is mistaken about the evidence against this kid you'll let us know?

I suspect there is more to this story than we know so far.

The kid cannot be "held indefinitely" or subjected to "enhanced interrogation" legally. "Enhanced interrogation" has already been banned under President Obama. The Bush administration was unable to apply "held indefinitely" except outside the USA, which is why there was extraordinary rendition and Guantanamo.

He is subjected to the rules and policies of the Juvenile Detention facility he is being held at, including that he can be sedated. Every kid who has been there since 2006 has the same risks, guilty or not.

Right now this is just a propoganda piece with a lot of mistakes, trying to forget that President Obama has ended many of the worst policies of the Bush administration.

 

 

 

Report this comment
#14) On May 06, 2009 at 9:36 AM, devoish (98.76) wrote:

Right now this is just a propoganda piece with a lot of mistakes, trying to forget that President Obama has ended many of the worst policies of the Bush administration.

Concerning the treatment of prisoners under the Patriot Act.

Report this comment
#15) On May 06, 2009 at 9:40 AM, ronb111 (72.93) wrote:

Not happy about the Patriot Act, aas I think it goes too far in restricting our liberties. We should not be able to hold someone for a prolonged period of time without charges being filed. I am not a fan of the ACLU, but I think they should be jumping all over this.

Report this comment
#16) On May 06, 2009 at 9:47 AM, whereaminow (73.77) wrote:

devoish,

I suspect there is more to this story than we know so far.

See, that's the point. Why, in America, can a 16 year old American citizen be held for two months without charges against him, and we don't know anything about it?  Very little media coverage. Nothing. 

If it turns out the mom is mistaken about the evidence against this kid you'll let us know?

If it turns out this kid is the second coming of the Unabomber rolled into a closet follower of the Taliban and has been using his Methodist background for cover, then yes, I'll let you know. I don't think it's likely though.

If, however, it turns out that the kid did indeed make a bomb threat, it still does not justify holding him without charges.

The kid cannot be "held indefinitely" or subjected to "enhanced interrogation" legally 

At what point do we reach "indefinitely?" I want to know so I can mark it on my calendar. The point is, if the kid is being held without charges, what difference does it make how long he is being held?  He needs to be released or charged right now, just like any other suspect in such a case.

And allow me to add a personal story.  When I was a 17 year old, I was working at JC Penney in the stock room.  I loved my boss and thought he got a bad deal of sorts.  When I quit, I wrote a letter to his boss defending him.  About a week later, I got a phone call requesting I come to the local police station.  They accused me of making bomb threats against the store.  It turns out, at the same time I quit, another kid got fired for stealing jeans out of the stock room.  They eventually arrested the kid for the bomb threats, but the police never "cleared" me.  Thank GOD there was no Patriot Act back then.

He is subjected to the rules and policies of the Juvenile Detention facility he is being held at, including that he can be sedated. Every kid who has been there since 2006 has the same risks, guilty or not.

Are the other kids at this federal detention center being held there without charges? 

Right now this is just a propoganda piece with a lot of mistakes, trying to forget that President Obama has ended many of the worst policies of the Bush administration.

If the Patriot Act is still in effect in 2012 you'll get back to me right?

I love State apologists.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#17) On May 06, 2009 at 10:43 AM, devoish (98.76) wrote:

I love State apologists.

I love name calling.

If the Patriot Act is still in effect in 2012 you'll get back to me right?

If the Patriot Act has aready been changed for the better, you'll ignore that right?

Keep us up to date, on this, will you? I'll let you know if I find anything else your article didn't report correctly.

Report this comment
#18) On May 06, 2009 at 10:59 AM, whereaminow (73.77) wrote:

devoish,

All those years that you were the scourge of the Bush administration, did you ever think that you'd be defending the Patriot Act a mere seven months after the election? This is the height of comedic irony.

Calling you a State apologist is not name calling at all.  I find myself being a Christian apologist at times.  An apologist is one who takes the counter side of the prosecuting argument, in this case, that would be the State. 

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#19) On May 06, 2009 at 12:18 PM, devoish (98.76) wrote:

David,

I am not defending the Patriot Act. I am defending the President of the United States for the steps his administration has taken to correct the Patriot Act against those who would pass their blame onto him.

There is more work to be done, but I will not be complicit in the pretense that progress has not already been made.

 

Report this comment
#20) On May 06, 2009 at 12:25 PM, infoseeker34 (< 20) wrote:

I just read about Ashton on Drudge, googled for more info and you came up.  Thanks for the post.  I am going to send the word out to as many people as I can.  I am also going to contact my local Senator and Congressman.  I have a 16 yr old and would hope for the same support.  US citizens can not afford to give up their liberties so easily.  This Minor, US Citizen, deserves fair representation and due process, both of which are beign denied to him.  This case reminds me of the cooked frog.  Put a frog in boiling water and he will jump out, put a frog in a pot of cold water and turn the heat on and he will not realize what is happening until it is to late.  We are giving up our liberties a little at a time and before you know it we will all be cooked and it will be to late. 

Report this comment
#21) On May 06, 2009 at 1:41 PM, devoish (98.76) wrote:

infoseeker,

Ashton is a minor. Sometimes minors are held in JV facilities without charges for their own protection from their parents or someone else in their home environment.

Sometimes that is the best thing to do for the child, sometimes it is a mistake, and sometimes it is a crime.

The article David linked to says there have been multiple bomb threats from Ashtons computer, not just the one that brought the FBI.

So far the reporters have not given us statement from the FBI, just someone who understands the FBI, who describes how this could happen under the Patriot Act.

There has been no statement from the JV facility where he is being held.

The comparison to Padilla, a grown man, who was denied a trial for 6 years is a stretch.

It is also possible that this story is, as it is described, an over reaching abuse of power by the FBI.

In which case it is a stretch to hold President Obama responsible for the actions of an FBI raid he was probably not consulted about.

Which is also very different than holding George Bush's administration responsible for authoring and passing the laws that denied Padilla his Constitutional rights.

If the boy is being held by the JV system while the safety of returning him to his home is being investigated, that is an issue to take the local JV system to task about, not the President.

If this is a continued failure of the Patriot Act, be glad the article is wrong about using "enhanced interrogation" techniques on this kid.

Perhaps this will be the test case that strikes down another of  the Patriot Acts violations of our Constitutional Rights.

 

 

Report this comment
#22) On May 06, 2009 at 1:57 PM, jtwestside (< 20) wrote:

"No, really, THAT'S IT.  There is no other evidence" ,,, That you've been told. Honestly people I'm going to be the first to jump on the "bash Barry bandwagon" when it comes to town. But you know absolutely nothing about this case.

Does it scare me given the fact that Obama seems just a little too close to being a Marxist for my tast. Not to mention that GWB did give leave him way too much power under the patriot act.

 But lets stay on topic here! Fact is it's just a little much that his mother knew that the ip could be cloned and used by someone else ... etc etc. I really just think that there is more to this story. And I think that it will come out in time (probably after the boy is water boarded and talks ...) Oh that's right we don't do that any more.

Report this comment
#23) On May 06, 2009 at 2:16 PM, devoish (98.76) wrote:

I found this:

http://indianapolis.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel09/ip030609a.htm

Report this comment
#24) On May 06, 2009 at 4:12 PM, bostoncelitcs (67.61) wrote:

Good for the FBI!!....sounds like a little Timmy McVeigh in the making.

There was no internet when I was 16.  I was out playing baseball with my classmates in "public school".  We didn't have the Columbine H.S. shootings.....or the shootings at Virginia Tech.  There was no David Koresh and the Branch Davidians in Waco, TX.

You are damn right we've lost liberties in the past decade.......but it's not because of  the 9/11 attacks....it's because of a few far right whack jobs and the NRA's stubborness on an assault weapons bans!!    I hope the kid didn't call in a bomb scare, but you have to take every precaution and the FBI did the right thing.

Report this comment
#25) On May 07, 2009 at 12:10 AM, DaretothREdux (48.12) wrote:

bostoncelitcs,

Again you are clearly missing the arguement. If there is a crime, charge the kid. It's very simple to do when there is evidence of wrong doing.

If not, release him. 60 days in federal prison sound like a fair punishment for a potentially "innocent" kid? At least, the last time I checked you are still innocent until proven guilty...

Report this comment
#26) On May 07, 2009 at 3:30 AM, whereaminow (73.77) wrote:

devoish,

Your reaction to this story is EXHIBIT A that the Left is as morally bankrupt as the Right.  You seem to care little for the individual being victimized or the feeling of the mother.  You express no concern for them.  You can present no argument supporting the State's holding of her son with no charges against him for two months.  All you can do is promise us that Obama will "tweak" the most horrible anti-civil liberties legislation in American history.

In fact, your only concern here is holding out the vainest hope that the story is not complete (that the State will emerge triumphant) and that I will be discredited.

My concern is that a sixteen year old boy is in federal prison without charges.

You need to do some soul searching.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#27) On May 07, 2009 at 11:57 AM, jtwestside (< 20) wrote:

I LOVE THE IRONY!!!

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/bloggers-tv-go-nuts-over-misleading-patriot-act-claim/

 PS look at what I wrote yesterday. Everyone needs to take a deep breath. Who are the real whack jobs here?

Report this comment
#28) On May 07, 2009 at 12:35 PM, whereaminow (73.77) wrote:

As of today (May 5), a criminal complaint in this case does exist, but Ashton has yet to be charged with a crime. My source, as I mentioned in the post.

If the mother is completely full of shit and he has been charged with a crime, then I am guilty or poor journalism (and not the first or last.)  However, I can find no evidence that a charge has been filed. 

Wired is no more reliable than any other news source. The information we are asking is what is the charge against him, if one exists.  Wired claims there is a charge. What is it?  They didn't answer it. They claim one exists, but cite no source for it. How reliable is that?

This commenter on the piece you cite said it best:

I appreciate your comments, but it’s not safe to assume that if Mr. Lundeby has an airtight alibi, the case against “won’t last long, and the feds will have some explaining to do.”

Ordinarily, the U. S. Government would have had to have charged Mr. Lundeby by now or let him go, but post-9/11, that’s no longer true. That’s not because the Constitution or any statutes have changed; it’s because American citizens and their courts (stupidly, I think) have found extended periods of detention without due process of law acceptable because of the perceived dangers of terrorism.

In that regard, this boy is not the first juvenile–U.S. citizen or otherwise–to have found himself caught up in prolonged Federal detention without due process. There’s been at least one other U. S. minor, as well as many, many alien minors, who have found themselves “trapped” in extended periods of detention without preferment of charges or benefit of habeas corpus.

As for the idea that the Feds might have “explaining to do” if they ultimately dropped charges against Mr. Lundeby, well, maybe not. The Feds will have “explaining to do” (in the way of compensatory damages, firings of agents, etc.) only if their arrest of Mr. Lundeby is later determined by the courts or the Department of Justice to have been “unreasonable.” On the face of the information thus far presented, his arrest was reasonable: a bomb threat was e-mailed to Purdue University from an IP address that at some point in time had been assigned to Mr. Lundeby. It might seem unfair to most, but that’s good enough for the U. S. Government to avoid all liability for “false arrest,” etc., to Mr. Lundeby, no matter that it might be later determined that he was a completely innocent victim of someone else “spoofing” his IP, MAC, or SMTP e-mail addresses. Because of the address linkage, the Government will have had a reasonable basis for at least “checking him out,” even if that entailed him spending a few months in prison. (And, the government will argue, since he’s a juvenile, what damages could he have suffered, anyway? After all, he wasn’t working at a “real” job–he was just going to high school!)

Finally, I don’t believe the fact that Mr. Lundeby and his computer have been held for the better part of two months now has any much relevance to the ultimate question of his innocence or guilt. In fact, I’m pretty sure (I won’t say why, though) that the U. S. Government’s computer crime forensics labs are overloaded with work, and they haven’t even gotten around to looking at the contents of his computer. That being the case, I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see this youngster sit in jail for a couple months more, and then be released with an “Oops, sorry,” and no charges (and no compensation) at all. I also wouldn’t be surprised to see him in a couple months more not only cop to a plea, but actually be guilty…but I’m going to want to see the evidence and judge it for myself first before I’ll blindly accept that he’s guilty. After all, he’s 16, he has no prior record, and he’s been in jail now for two months without charges. There’s something wrong with that picture….

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#29) On May 07, 2009 at 12:37 PM, kdakota630 (33.34) wrote:

Where's the ACLU on this one?

Report this comment
#30) On May 07, 2009 at 12:48 PM, whereaminow (73.77) wrote:

Owing to the federal gag order on the officials involved in the arrest and prospective prosecution of Ashton Lundeby, it's not possible to get the official reaction to Annette Lundeby's view of this case.

However, I received a message from a source close to the federal side of the story who insists that the case against Ashton is a "slam-dunk," owing to information obtained from various documents and other sources. Without getting specific permission from that individual I can't share the details he shared with me. I have described some of them, in broad outline, to Mrs. Lundeby in order to get her view of the matter.

Although the alleged crime here is inter-state in nature, the source in question agrees that the so-called PATRIOT Act (which this person opposes) shouldn't have been used in this case. The alleged offense here is the cyberspace equivalent of maliciously pulling a fire alarm in school. Yes, it's disruptive, obnoxious, and destructive of time, money, and whoever phoned in what the source describes as multiple bomb threats should be punished.- William N. Grigg

I'm really interested to see how this shakes out.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#31) On May 07, 2009 at 1:53 PM, devoish (98.76) wrote:

The description of the boy being held in a Federal Prison is intended to exagerate the perception of abusive government.

There is a JV facility in South Bend.

The nearest and only Federal Prison I can find in Indiana is in Terra Haute and is 200 miles South of South Bend.

Incidentally, you may want to join the liberal left and come out against the death penalty before a mistaken or corrupt Government puts this boy, or any other man or woman to death.

kdakota,

Please call the ACLU and get back to us with their answer. I know they have taken the Patriot Act to court long before this boy was arrested. Did you support them then?

 

Report this comment
#32) On May 07, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Goronmon (90.47) wrote:

As of today (May 5), a criminal complaint in this case does exist, but Ashton has yet to be charged with a crime.

A response from someone who has a bit of experience in law matters.

 Oh, merciful Mother of God. A criminal complaint is the document by which one is charged with a crime. The above sentence is like saying, "He has a birth certificate, but his birth hasn't been certified."

Source

Report this comment
#33) On May 07, 2009 at 2:13 PM, theHedgehog (< 20) wrote:

Does this kid really exist?  Have you all been had by an urban legend?

Report this comment
#34) On May 07, 2009 at 5:28 PM, whereaminow (73.77) wrote:

A response from someone who has a bit of experience in law matters.

 Oh, merciful Mother of God. A criminal complaint is the document by which one is charged with a crime. The above sentence is like saying, "He has a birth certificate, but his birth hasn't been certified."

Wow. Just wow. A complaint is the informal summary of the prosecution's case.  A charge is the formal accusation.  

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#35) On May 08, 2009 at 1:28 AM, FleaBagger (33.08) wrote:

devoish: "Blah, blah, blah, Obama is perfect and his administration spells the end of all trouble and unhappiness, blah, blah, blah."

Report this comment
#36) On May 09, 2009 at 12:55 AM, whereaminow (73.77) wrote:

This story is falling apart and it has now become obvious that the mother is full of it.  Not only did she fabricate the involvement of the Patriot Act, but apparently she was aware that her son had been making bomb threats over the Internet.  I don't know how she he expected that none of this would eventually come to light, but shame on her for lying.

I hope you'll accept my apologies for bringing this story to your attention. I'll learn from it.

David in Qatar

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement