Shameless.
Gee, it's a day that ends in "Y", must be time for the Bush administration to kick the Bill of Rights in the sack again. Unless you've been under a rock for the last month or so (hiding from the War on Christmas, no doubt), you know about Dubya's warrantless wiretapping program. Basically, what it boils down to, is that the President can wiretap whomever he wants to, just by saying "They have links to terrists." Just by SAYING it. American citizens. Ostensibly protected by the Fourth amendment against unreasonable search and seizure. WTF?
Now don't get me wrong. I understand the need for government agencies to conduct covert monitoring of communications that relate to terrorist acts on our soil. Fundamentally, I'm not opposed to the concept. If it keeps a bus full of nuns and children from getting asploded, then it's worth it. But here we have a little something called "Due Process" that I suggest our Fearless Leader familiarize himself with. Sometimes, it's true, the Process can get in the way of an urgent need for a wiretap, as a certian amount of red tape is unavoidable. This is why the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was passed, allowing for a court that has guidelines for issuing warrants that take national security issues more into account than other judicial bodies. Due process, recognizing that one size doesn't fit all when you're talking about agents of a foreign power.
However, Bush the Second doesn't even feel like he has to do that. He's taken the position, against significant resistance that he's got the unquestionable authority to conduct these searches as he sees fit. John Ashcroft, recovering from gall bladder surgery, had to sign off on the plan from his hospital bed, because his top deputy wouldn't. Effectively, even the Justice department was telling him "Hey, W, this is a bad idea."
He didn't, and doesn't care. He's grabbed the power and is wielding it as he sees fit. After all, that 51% mandate gives him supreme executive power. His own words: "If people want to play politics with the Patriot Act, it's ... not in the best interests of the country..."(Full article) Translation: Questioning my actions is un-American. A recurring theme for our current chief exec. "You're either with us or against us" also comes to mind.
Time was, you could speak out against the government without fear of governmental reprisal. Now in order to attend a public appearance of the man we (allegedly) elected, you have to sign a loyalty oath. Read that again. An oath of loyalty. W is so focused on discrediting his opposition as un-American that he won't even tolerate the very appearance of dissent. He's answerable to nobody except himself. He won't even give lip service to the concept of being answerable to a voting public growing less and less enamored of him.
Let's also not forget something else: The groups who seek to commit terrorist acts against us do so because (in part) they don't believe we should have the freedoms to live as we choose, to speak as we choose, and to associate with whom we choose. Every time we curtail our own freedoms, the enemy wins a battle. I fear what will happen if we win the war for them.
Now don't get me wrong. I understand the need for government agencies to conduct covert monitoring of communications that relate to terrorist acts on our soil. Fundamentally, I'm not opposed to the concept. If it keeps a bus full of nuns and children from getting asploded, then it's worth it. But here we have a little something called "Due Process" that I suggest our Fearless Leader familiarize himself with. Sometimes, it's true, the Process can get in the way of an urgent need for a wiretap, as a certian amount of red tape is unavoidable. This is why the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was passed, allowing for a court that has guidelines for issuing warrants that take national security issues more into account than other judicial bodies. Due process, recognizing that one size doesn't fit all when you're talking about agents of a foreign power.
However, Bush the Second doesn't even feel like he has to do that. He's taken the position, against significant resistance that he's got the unquestionable authority to conduct these searches as he sees fit. John Ashcroft, recovering from gall bladder surgery, had to sign off on the plan from his hospital bed, because his top deputy wouldn't. Effectively, even the Justice department was telling him "Hey, W, this is a bad idea."
He didn't, and doesn't care. He's grabbed the power and is wielding it as he sees fit. After all, that 51% mandate gives him supreme executive power. His own words: "If people want to play politics with the Patriot Act, it's ... not in the best interests of the country..."(Full article) Translation: Questioning my actions is un-American. A recurring theme for our current chief exec. "You're either with us or against us" also comes to mind.
Time was, you could speak out against the government without fear of governmental reprisal. Now in order to attend a public appearance of the man we (allegedly) elected, you have to sign a loyalty oath. Read that again. An oath of loyalty. W is so focused on discrediting his opposition as un-American that he won't even tolerate the very appearance of dissent. He's answerable to nobody except himself. He won't even give lip service to the concept of being answerable to a voting public growing less and less enamored of him.
Let's also not forget something else: The groups who seek to commit terrorist acts against us do so because (in part) they don't believe we should have the freedoms to live as we choose, to speak as we choose, and to associate with whom we choose. Every time we curtail our own freedoms, the enemy wins a battle. I fear what will happen if we win the war for them.
posted by Zach Burnham at 8:10 PM (click for permalink)
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home