Posted on 10/22/2004 11:20:58 AM PDT by grundle
http://badnarik.org/plans_civilliberties.php
Civil Liberties
The erosion of our civil liberties since 9/11 does not represent a new phenomenon. It represents an acceleration of long-existing trends. As president, my goal will be to to reverse those trends and to restore, respect and enforce the Bill of Rights.
In crafting the Bill of Rights, the framers were careful to acknowledge implicitly and explicitly two key truths:
The first is that government does not grant rights it acknowledges them. They exist independently of government. They're part of who and what we are. And, as Jefferson noted in the Declaration of Independence, the only legitimate function of government is to secure them.
The second is that government is a servant to whom we delegate powers, not a master who dispenses privileges. The Constitution carefully enumerates the powers we, the people, delegate to our government and it specifically denies that government any powers not so delegated. Our rights lie beyond the pale of that delegation. They are sacrosanct. Any government which infringes upon them is engaged in an intolerable usurpation.
The history of our nation is the story of a government constantly attempting to outgrow the Constitutional box we put it in and of a people struggling to stuff it back into that box. Sadly, government has grown so far beyond its Constitutional bounds that we can barely see the box any more.
How did that happen? A little at a time. There's always someone who would have us trade a little liberty for a little security a "reasonable gun control" law here, a "War on Drugs" there ... before you know it, it all adds up. What it adds up to is the USA PATRIOT Act, the FBI spying on library patrons and hundreds, maybe even thousands of prisoners held without charge, counsel or even public acknowledgement that they've been "detained."
How do we fix it? By being just as uncompromising in our defense of liberty as our enemies are in their attacks upon it. Let us take our cue from Barry Goldwater: "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."
As your president, I will act in accordance with my oath to the Constitution of the United States all of it, with special emphasis on the Bill of Rights. I will veto legislation which in any way infringes upon those rights. I will shut down any agency or activity in the executive branch which has, as its mission, the infringement of those rights. And I will direct the Attorney General and the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division to aggressively prosecute, under USC Title 18, Sections 241 and 242, any government employee who violates those rights.
Rights of the Accused
Of all the infringements upon our Constitutionally protected rights, the most egregious in living memory may be the post-9/11 "detention" of individuals American and non-American in secrecy and without charges or access to counsel.
As someone who values all our rights, I do not make this statement lightly. Consider, however, the nature of the crime (and yes, it is a crime).
Under normal circumstances, if one's rights are violated, one may petition the government for redress of grievances, go to court to obtain satisfaction, or take some other action to regain the expression of the rights which were infringed upon.
People like Joseph Padilla, Yaser Hamdi and the hundreds maybe even thousands of individuals illegally detained by the federal government, both at home and abroad, have no such recourse. In many cases, the government doesn't even admit that it has them in custody. If they are tried, it may be by "military tribunal" a kangaroo court from which there is no appeal and in which they may be denied the right to confront their accusers or to examine the evidence against them.
This is not how we do things in America. We do not kidnap people. We do not hold prisoners without charge or justification. And we do not operate or condone the equivalent of Charles the First's "Star Chamber" secret courts with arbitrary and capricious proceedings and standards of evidence.
Among the complaints our Founding Fathers cited in their Declaration of Independence as justification for throwing off the British government, we find the following:
"For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury ... For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences ... For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government ..."
Those same framers enshrined the rights that George III violated in the Constitution they created to replace his rule. They were right to do so, and their example must be followed.
In the case of "enemy combatants" and other "detainees," the choice is quite simple: They may be held as prisoners of war, with all the protections afforded them by the Geneva Convention (a treaty ratified by the Senate pursuant to its Constitutional Authority), or they may be held as accused criminals with all the protections afforded them by the Constitution. There are no other lawful alternatives.
As your president, I will act swiftly to have all "detainees" properly classified.
Those charged with crimes will receive access to counsel, speedy public trial by jury, the right to confront their accusers, to examine the evidence against them and to produce evidence and witnesses in their own defense.
Those held as prisoners of war will, if a state of war obtains, be treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention until such time as the war ends and they can be repatriated to their countries of origin.
Those who do not answer to either description will be freed, indemnified and offered the sincere apologies due them.
It's time for America to start being America again.
If you want to end the provisions that apply to drug dealers that's a fair debate, but if you want to start with the Patriot Act, then you're weak on terror.
Barry Goldwater: "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."
It's interesting that he uses a quote by Barry Goldwater, but ignores it's message.
Especially the first part "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice".
Exactly.
I'm a dues-paying LP member, and that's one of the reasons I'm voting for GWB this year, not Badnarik.
Golly, it is sure going to be exciting to see that sudden 'Boom For Badnarik' sweep the Nation in the next 10 days.
Sorry, I'm still voting for George W. Bush, I don't think a First Lady ought to be named 'Natasha'.
Ooops. My bad. I thought this guy was Boris Badenoff from the Rocky & Bullwinkle cartoon.
It's ok, he's still a cartoon.
I was actually one of these "who cares?/screw the ACLU" people when it came to 'civil liberties', because I didn't see the relevance to me. ...until a friend's house burned down, and the cops tried to charge him with felony drug dealing when they found some old prescription oxycontin in the apartment, along with a gun. The pills were from a few years back when he had a broken leg...He saved about 15 of them in an unmarked plastic baggie, which is apparently illegal...and had them stored in the medicine cabinet next to a few Sudafed Cold tabs (We learned that an ingredient in Sudafed can be used to create crystal METH...and the pills, along with a bottle of Zippo lighter fluid was enough to add another felony charge--"prerequisites for producing methemphatamine" to the list)
Old painkillers in a baggie + some cold tablets + a gun in the closet (bought legally of course) was enough for the cops to suspect him of drug dealing, and to throw the book at him with THREE felony charges that could have put him away for LIFE. Aside from losing everything in the fire (including his dog), he had a cloud of a lifetime prison sentence hanging over his head for several months.
You would not believe the stress that this caused. It's times like that, you are thankful for the ACLU and every group in this country that fights for civil liberties. I don't care how much you disagree with them on other issues, you will be damn glad to have their council when something bad happens to you or a loved one.
It is not unfair or un-American to criticize the patriot act, especially parts that can allow innocent people to be accused and charged with crimes on very weak evidence. Not only that...but they can be held without a lawyer indefinately. I say to anyone who supports these parts of the patriot act...If you were in their, you would consider it criminally unjust.
It is wrong to support these policies. Some parts of the PA should be abolished, and I don't think it makes one a "liberal" to say so.
As your president, I will act in accordance with my oath to the Constitution of the United States all of it, with special emphasis on the Bill of Rights. I will veto legislation which in any way infringes upon those rights. I will shut down any agency or activity in the executive branch which has, as its mission, the infringement of those rights. And I will direct the Attorney General and the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division to aggressively prosecute, under USC Title 18, Sections 241 and 242, any government employee who violates those rights.
The Left is always trying to create new laws (such as for "hate crimes") when current laws against vandalism and assault and murder suffice.
Now, "conservatives" are always seeking new laws despite the old laws sufficing. Why? Because, some say, "If my President says he needs this law, then that's good enough for me!"
"Conservatives" are the new leftists.
Agreed. Government has gotten so intrusive, doing so many things the Framers did not design it to do. However, defense and security are something we must do in common. This law is needed to strengthen enforcement to counter bad guys.
I agree that the whole country has moved to the left, but I don't just agree b/c it's Bush. We are fighting a war for our survival, and I have no problem with using tools being used on drug dealers being used for terrorists for now.
The tools "being used on drug dealers" have long since been turned on the American people. The same will happen to the tool being used on "terrorists."
Hitler and Stalin also used "terrorists" as an excuse to expand their state powers. Remember the Reichstag fire? For that matter, remember Animal Farm? Every time Napoleon wanted to expand his power, it was because of terrorism from Snowball or Farmer Jones.
The state is not your friend, even when it's draped with pretty "stars and stripes" flags, and even when the president wears a spiffy military uniform. Unfortunately, many "conservatives" see pretty patriotic images, and they go all weak at the knees. Just like "liberals", most conservatives seem to be ruled by their emotions rather than their minds.
The Patriot Act was actually written by Gary Hart and Andrew Young; they're only embraced as Conservatives in the context of the Patriot Act.
Thank you for that post. I agree with you.
Fellow Libertarians should not vote with the party this year. "Libertarian" Michael Badnarik is a dangerous fraud. Badnarik--who is Lebanese and has taken tons of cash from the American Muslim Alliance (the group from which even Hillary returned the contributions!) has disturbing ties to supporters of Islamic terrorism. The Muslims are using the "Libertarian" label to hurt Bush. Badnarik is a total phony. Libertarians should not be fooled by this Wahhabist stooge!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.