Pax_Vitae
February 9, 2003, 3:24am
1
Do you feel the American Government is going enough to protect you from Terrorism?
It’s up to you what you make of this, but personally it’s times like this I’m glad I live on a little out of the way island. The following two links have more information on the topic’s title. It’s going to be called the 'Domestic Security Enhancement Act’.
www.PBS.org
The Center for Public Integrity
Here are some comments that I found interesting on a website called Slashdot.org . They don’t necessarily reflect my own opinions, but I found them interesting none the less.
If you aren’t willing to defend the civil liberties of those who you disagree with (or disagree with you) then you’re probably not committed to the concept in the first place. It’s easy to defend the right of expression for people who say things you like. Or as Dr. Chomsky puts it, “If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.”
“both current major political parties want one thing: Big, caretaker government.â€
No, it is the majority of the American people that want “Big, caretaker government”. For some reason the majority of the general American populace seems to feel that the government should and worst yet, could provide the omnipotent and benevolent protection of a diety.
This is why acts such as the Patriot Act are so easily and quickly passed by such a majority. The government obviously, cannot really provide such a level of protection but, they are still all too happy to accept the power supposedly necessary to provide it. The fact that the majority of the people actually believe that any government could provide such a level of protection speaks volumes about the intelligence of the man on the street.
That thing just scares me…
Secret Arrests
Having your citizenship striped for even unknowingly supporting terrorism (in Ashcrofts mind, who knows what that could include)
And that list just goes on and on… Alls I can say is if that gets past as is … “Oh Canada…”
Of course Ashcroft and I would assume Bush were probably waiting till there little war with Iraq started to introduce/pass this so the public wouldn’t notice.
The “land of the free” is going to be less and less free. Damn I’m glad that I am a european citizen. Now, If we could only get the British gov to stop proposing similar dumb laws (ie. EUCD) that make the EU look more like the USA. If this one goes through, I’ve got yet another reason to avoid going to the USA and working/living there.
Conspiracy theory… Okay, the odds that this legislation would get passed right now is really slim. I mean, without the pressing fear of imminent terrorism, there’s no motivation for it. So, I’m wondering if the DOJ’s intent in drafting this was to keep it on the shelf until the next terrorist attack happens. Then they would come out and explain that they couldn’t stop it because they didn’t have all the powers they need, and conveniently they’d have legislation ready to roll. I’m very glad this has come out at a time when our heads are mostly screwed on straight so we can shoot it down in the light of day.
Remember what Sen. Feingold said about a return to an era of invasion of privacy and harrassment. In 20’s and 30’s america labor leaders and other troublemakers could expect to be spied on, harrassed, framed for this and that (John Steinbeck never went to a hotel alone for fear of being framed for rape). In the post-war era it wasn’t so bad, but even then there was McCarthyism and spying was done on suspected communists that’d raise quite a few eyebrows now. It’s really only since the civil rights era that Americans have come to expect the very high level of privacy and fairness that our generation has enjoyed.
Rather than sinking into a new and unexpected bad patch, it’s more that along good patch may be ending.
“When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” Of course this was a popular quotation for Timothy McVeigh. The second part of the quote: “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
Now at least the govt is being OPEN about its fascist tendencies… which makes it easier to resist, if anyone is left who has the heart. Ben Franklin said it best, I think… something to the effect of “Anyone who would trade freedom for security deserves neither.”… And history will show, gets neither as well.
How many people had to die for freedom, because appearantly it only takes 3000 deaths to take it back. More people die every year of the flu, but I don’t see acts of congress trying to prevent flu as serious as these. Aids will kill more people this year, but the government isn’t sinking the kind of money they used to fight Afghanistan to find a cure. This isn’t about American lives, it’s about changing our govenment to a police state. We’re going to war with Iraq for 2 reasons. #1 oil, #2 to try to keep Bush’s popularity up amongst the red-necks. He’s the most horrid president that the US has ever seen. Even if his policies tend to show that he wants to rid the US from dependance on oil, he has done so much to harm freedom and the economy. From his tax plan to having the DOJ pretty much drop the MS issue, he’s screwed the economy to the point of practically no return. The job market is getting thinner. He has allowed or worked to create many laws that break the fundamental rights of Americans. The Patriot Act should be unconstitutional because we are given freedom from unreasonable search and seizures. Don’t depend on the courts saving you though, because the whole MS issue has only taught us that they can’t be trusted either.
Well what do you think?
Pax Vitae
Matt
February 9, 2003, 2:18pm
2
They tried this in England and got a huge backlash. They were going to give huge sweeping powers of snooping and access of our digital information to loads of branches of our government, but were very surprised at the resistance to the proposals. Had to scrap the whole lot and go back to the drawing board.
It all depends on how your media react to it, it was our media that led the campaign against, they seem to think they’ve got to be the opposition as the conservatives seem a litttle dazed and confused that they’e not in government. It’s only been, what 10 years now.
Pax_Vitae
February 9, 2003, 3:20pm
3
www.CNN.com
“To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America’s enemies and pause to America’s friends. They encourage people of good will to remain silent in the face of evil.”
Any American’s out there???
PV
Pax_Vitae
February 9, 2003, 3:30pm
4
Hi Matt,
They tried this in England and got a huge backlash. They were going to give huge sweeping powers of snooping and access of our digital information to loads of branches of our government, but were very surprised at the resistance to the proposals. Had to scrap the whole lot and go back to the drawing board.
I remember that one it had me a little upset. As there’s always a chance that it would be put before the EU to make it into European Law. So, before you know it (for places like Ireland), it slips through the back door because of treaties that modified our Constitution.
PV