Librarians Against the Patriot Act

Front Page Magazine ^ | 2-27-06 | Michael P. Tremoglie

[William Tell 2]

Who is the ultimate authority on whether a homeland security surveillance measure is appropriate: the president, Congress, or the Supreme Court? According to its president, the answer is the American Library Association.

Dom Giordano, talk show host for Philadelphia’s radio station WPHT 1210-AM, interviewed American Library Association (ALA) president Michael Gorman on February 9. One of issues addressed concerned the ALA’s policy towards governmental investigation of library patron’s reading materials.

During the interview Gorman reiterated the policy of the ALA, which instructs librarians to ensure that any search warrants they receive from the FBI regarding library records are legal. They advise librarians to consult with legal counsel. Apparently, the librarians of the American Library Association are the self-appointed sentinels of the civil liberties of American citizens.

Yet, the ALA policy concerns whether a librarian should comply with a search warrant – issued by a genuine neutral magistrate, not a self-appointed one – for authorities who want to determine if an individual is a fanatic planning to participate in a terrorist plot. The federal government is not implementing an investigation of an individual’s politics – which is what totalitarian societies do.

However, the ALA disagrees. Its resolution on the USA PATRIOT Act states, “The American Library Association (ALA) opposes any use of governmental power to suppress the free and open exchange of knowledge and information or to intimidate individuals exercising free inquiry…ALA considers that sections of the USA PATRIOT ACT are a present danger to the constitutional rights and privacy rights of library users.”

On its webpage, the ALA announces, “The USA PATRIOT Act…expanded the authority of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and law enforcement to gain access to…library records, including stored electronic data and communications…These enhanced surveillance procedures pose the greatest challenge to privacy and confidentiality in the library.”

Moreover, the ALA has drafted a policy that states that they intend to resist enforcement of this law if they feel it is inappropriate. Point number three of the ALA Policy on Confidentiality of Library Records recommends that librarians, “Resist the issuance of enforcement of any such process, order, or subpoena until such time as a proper showing of good cause has been made in a court of competent jurisdiction.” They then qualify this by stating, “the library's officers will consult with their legal counsel to determine if such process, order, or subpoena is in proper form and if there is a showing of good cause for its issuance.” The ALA then refers their members to the Library Bill of Rights, a policy adopted in 1948 by the ALA Council.

First Amendment activist Nat Hentoff, a writer for the Village Voice, is not too happy with the ALA Council. Hentoff, who supports the ALA's campaign against the PATRIOT Act, apparently believes the ALA Council is hypocritical. Hentoff wrote:

while I am impressed by this assembly of mass indignation (about the PATRIOT Act)… there's something missing. So far as I know, in this congregation of freedom-to-read activists, not one on the list—except for PEN—has said or done anything about the torment that 10 independent librarians in Cuba are undergoing in Fidel Castro's gulag, along with 65 other pro-democracy dissidents rounded up in the dictator's crackdown in April last year…The governing council of the American Library Association, an organization on the list, disgraced itself in January when it overwhelmingly rejected an amendment to a final report at its mid-winter meeting telling Castro to let the librarians out. Apparently there are members of the council who romanticize Fidel, as do some Hollywood celebrities.

Hentoff also wrote that directors of the ALA and some members believe that independent Cuban librarians are lackeys of the U.S. government (something they would never be). He quotes Mark Rosenzweig of the ALA’s governing council as saying, “we cannot presume that all countries are capable of the same level of intellectual freedom that we have in the U.S. Cuba is caught in an extremely sharp conflict with the U.S....I don't think [Cuba] is a dictatorship. It's a republic.”

Rosenzweig is alsothe Director of the Reference Center for Marxist Studies. A Marxist civil libertarian seems like an oxymoron to me....

A January 2001 report by the ALA’s International Relations Caribbean Subcommittee incredibly concluded, “While the civil oppression of individuals (Cuban independent librarians)…appears to be documented by Amnesty International and other observers, it is not conclusive whether these conditions result from the denial of intellectual freedom or from anti-government activities by the persons involved.”

So if one is to understand this correctly, the ALA deems it permissible for the “civil oppression of individuals” to occur if it is the result of “anti-government activities” by those individuals. Yet, the FBI investigating whether someone who reads Muslim terrorist publications, or books describing bomb making, or communicating with suspected terrorists, is a threat to the Republic is not okay?

This report also quoted Ann Sparanese, of the Englewood (NJ) Public Library as saying, “Almost all the individuals operating these 'libraries' identify themselves as dissidents and members of anti-Castro political parties…she has seen no evidence of censorship or confiscation of books in her many visits to Cuba.”

Others besides Nat Hentoff have criticized ALA’s hypocrisy as well. Only a few weeks ago, at the January 25, 2006 ALA midwinter meeting, author and National Public Radio commentator Andrei Codrescu, who was an invited speaker, chided the ALA for not condemning the imprisonment of Cuban librarians.

Maine librarian Walter Skold, is a co-founder of FREADOM, a coalition of - one might say - libertarian librarians who have campaigned for freeing the Cuban librarians. Skold has written for FrontPage Magazine concerning the Castro sympathizers among the ALA membership.

How can Americans believe that the ALA’s campaign against the PATRIOT Act is legitimate because of their love of American civil liberties when many of the ALA membership admire one of the most terrible violators of civil liberties extant? The ALA has no credibility. It is not so much concerned about American civil liberties as it is about making a political statement about Republicans, President Bush and the conservative value of Americans defending themselves from all threats foreign and domestic?

In November 2003, the National Constitution Center conducted a poll in association with the Gallup organization, asking, “Do you think the PATRIOT Act goes too far, is about right, or does not go far enough in restricting people’s civil liberties in order to fight terrorism?”

All told, 45 percent of those who replied said the PATRIOT Act was about right, while 20 percent said it did not go far enough. Only 25 percent of those surveyed by the National Constitution Center / Gallup poll – neither of which is considered a member of the vast right wing conspiracy - said the Patriot Act goes too far in restricting people’s civil liberties in order to fight terrorism.

The ALA does not seem to have public opinion on its side. Nor does it have reason, consistency, or good common sense.

Michael P. Tremoglie is the author of the soon-to-be-released novel A Sense of Duty, and an ex-Philadelphia cop. E-mail him at elfegobaca2@earthlink.net.

[Migraine]

Librarians are highly territorial.

[muawiyah]

The librarians around here were "dating" Middle Easterners who turned out to be the ground support team for the AlQaida operation run out of Dulles Airport.

I'm guessing their lobbyists are located in this area.

No doubt they were "dating" the same guys.

No librarian can be trusted in this war.

[muawiyah]

The librarians around here were "dating" Middle Easterners who turned out to be the ground support team for the AlQaida operation run out of Dulles Airport.

I'm guessing their lobbyists are located in this area.

No doubt they were "dating" the same guys.

No librarian can be trusted in this war.

[Verginius Rufus]

Hentoff could also have cited the ALA's refusal to condemn the deliberate destruction of the national library of Bosnia by Karadzic's men during the siege of Sarajevo, which burned up a large portion of the original documents from the Ottoman centuries of Bosnian history...an outrage comparable to the German destruction of the library in Louvain in 1914, or maybe worse in its impact.

[Mears]

"

---

Terror threat sparks Newton librarian/FBI standoff
Boston Herald ^ | 01/25/06 | Dan Atkinson


Posted on 01/25/2006 3:05:00 PM EST by danno3150


Newton officials are calling their refusal to allow FBI agents access to library computers without a warrant during a terrorist threat last week “their finest hour.”

Law enforcement officials say it’s a “nightmare.”

Police rushed to the Newton Free Library after tracing a terrorist threat e-mailed to Brandeis University to a computer at the library.

But requests to examine computers Jan. 18 were rebuffed by Newton library Director Kathy Glick-Weil and Mayor David Cohen on the grounds that they did not have a warrant.

Cohen, defending the library’s actions, called the legal standoff one of Newton’s “finest hours.”

“We showed you can enforce the law — without jeopardizing the privacy of innocent citizens,” the mayor said.

It took U.S. attorneys several hours to finally secure a warrant, Glick-Weil said, and they took the computer from the library at about 11:30 that night, after the library had closed.

Brandeis received the alleged e-mail threat at about 11 a.m., according to Waltham Lt. Brian Navin. While police reportedly didn’t find anything threatening after evacuating 12 buildings at Brandeis and a nearby elementary school, by about 2 p.m., the e-mail was traced to a computer at the Newton Free Library.

Newton police, followed shortly by FBI and state police officers, rushed to the library to lock the building down, Glick-Weil said.

“There was a lot of excitement going on,” she said.

An FBI spokesman, as well as Lt. Bruce Apotheker of the Newton police, both said their offices would not comment on the investigation.

But a law enforcement official close to the investigation said in an e-mail the confrontation was a “nightmare.”

Nancy Murray, director of education for the Boston branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, said she was surprised the FBI asked for information without a warrant.

“They couldn’t possibly expect to get (the computer) without a warrant,” she said. “Good for the library for knowing more about warrants than the police.”

[LegendHasIt]

And liberal as heck.

I donated three copies of Buzz Patterson's "Derelection of Duty" to my local library when it was first published (I've given them hundreds of books from pretty rare local history books to modern fiction and non fiction over the years).

When I laid them on the desk and the librarian saw Bill Clinton's smarmy grinning face on the cover she was effusive if not orgasmic in her thank yous.

A little later, when I was on my way out of the library, after she got a chance to get an idea what the content of the books was, she (literally) used a yardstick to push the books back at me as if she feared contamination by conservative and patriotic ideals and said : "We don't need THESE kinds of books in THIS library."

There are SEVERAL copies of Hillary's and Bill's pseudo-biographies on the shelves and in the catalog, but almost no current books of a conservative nature.

And I've quit donating books of any sort to them.

When I was a kid, seemed like every librarian loved to get any kind of book, regardless of content. Now the lefties teaching "library science" in the colleges, they only want books that are completely apolitical and amoral, or ones that reinforce their leftwing, anti-American agenda.

[Mears]

What they did to you is book burning without the flames.

See my Post 6 for what I have to put up with at my public library.

[Dr. Scarpetta]

Nowadays librarians appear to be liberals who have no problem with people watching porn all day or checking out bomb-making sites in their library.

[Honcho Bongs]

The ALA is also silent on the cartoons of Mohammed even though they claim to be the world's defenders of free speech and even though the majority of their members support free speech:

http://www.ala.org/ala/alonline/aldirecta/2006pollresults/2006polls.htm

I guess that means the ALA leadership thinks you should only be free to see porn at taxpayer expense at your local library.

Mark Rosensweig, the communist librarian mentioned in this article is also infamous for saying "F**k the troops!" in messages sent to members of the Intellectual Freedom Forum mailing list of the ALA. The man is a pathetic excuse for a human being.

Most librarians are normal, intelligent people, but the librarians who seek the leadership positions seem to be myopic collectivists who are dragging the whole profession into the sewer. Too bad.

[concentric circles]

Hentoff Renounces ALA Freedom Award

...I had received the prized ALA Immroth Award for Intellectual Freedom. The citation reads: "For courageous and articulate advocacy of the First Amendment as an author, speaker, and activist for human rights" (June 1983).

I now publicly renounce the Immroth Award and demand that the American Library Association remove me from the list of recipients of that honor. To me, it is no longer an honor...

[barj]

Can't be trusted, eh? Well I'm one.

If a law enforcement agency has a warrant, libraries will and do comply. Various acts, passed recently, are asking librarians to keep records they normally do not carry. Check out records simply do not exist after the property borrowed is returned. Material viewed in a library is not recorded as having been viewed. Various agencies are in effect looking for us to do their bidding, do their work, and pay for it too. The FBI, nor any other agency wishes to fund any form of record keeping or surveillience they wish librarians to perform. These agencies are effectively on fishing expeditions, which the constitution strictly forbids. What they are doing is akin to going into a book store and asking a clerk who bought what.

Furthermore, where do such invasions end? Perhaps every site you visit on the WEB should be reported? Perhaps every video you rent should be made available to law enforcement? Perhaps all reading material you purchase should be recorded somehow, just in case? Perhaps all your firearms should be recorded in a national data base? After all, it's simply information and there isn't much to prohibit such registration.

They had the information they needed to prevent 9/11 and they failed. Not that I fault them for that, there were likely tons of similar information available and sorting out which is pressing and which isn't is a monumental task. But to piss away our freedoms and rights to fight this so called war is silly. The more restrictive and invasive we allow the government to become, the more they, that is the terrorists win.

[KittyKares]

I am a librarian, too, but I have a different understanding of what we are required to do. My library goes out of its way to try not to have any records so that if a subpoena is issued, they will have nothing to provide. I never heard of having to create records, nor of fishing expeditions. There has to be enough credible evidence that a judge will issue a subpoena for records. My library would not turn over anything without one, so I see no danger of patrons having every web site they view being scrutinized.

Looking through the lenses of liberal bias can distort what one sees.

[rlmorel]

"...to fight this so called war is silly. The more restrictive and invasive we allow the government to become, the more they, that is the terrorists win."

I take issue with your rhetoric. What do you mean "so called war"?

You don't know who this guy is.

This fellow was an acquaintance of mine. His name was David Kovalcin, he had a wife and two daughters, and he was killed on 9/11 on American Flight 11. There were 3000 other people that day who had simliar stories. A so called war?

That is damned easy for you to say.

You can disagree with the way the war is being fought, but people on your end of the spectrum, contributed to the inability of our government to see and take action in time to prevent something like 9/11.

You are all too happy to take the moral high ground and have pristine hands, while you let others do the dirty work behind the scenes as you condemn them. You, and plenty of people like you don't mind taking a free ride on the backs of others who guarantee your safety.

Liberals.

[barj]

There has been talk in congress and in the FBI in the past of requiring libraries to maintain records. Sorry I cannot recall articles directly, but I do remember reading such. Personally, I see nothing wrong with the way libraries are run now, sans records.

The insidiousness of what the gov desires, I think, is evident in the NAIS (National Animal Identification System). Such a system is precurser for keeping track of much more than animals.

Nice to meet a librarian who is of a conservative nature. I needn't tell you what the general crop is like.

[rlmorel]

"...Police rushed to the Newton Free Library after tracing a terrorist threat e-mailed to Brandeis University to a computer at the library. "

Gee, they sure are very proud of themselves. Let's hope it isn't their children who happen to be in the daycare at the bottom of the next imploding skyscraper.

[rlmorel]

You have my sympathy. You live in Newton. Well, know there are other things Newton has going for it, but the entire city of Newton, MA is to the left of Cambridge. No, I take that back. Berkeley, CA and Madison, WI are to the left of Newton.

[barj]

Nice. Your smarminess doesn't go far with me. Parading the dead around as a shield for your position is pathetic. Did you take a lesson from Cindy's book? As a former Marine, I understand sacrifice. I am truly sorry about your friend, but I do not believe we should give up what we have here to catch these guys. Even were it 2 million people killed rather than 2000, I do not believe we give up our rights to win this battle. It would certainly be easier to catach criminals, terrorists and othe bad guys if the constitution were not in the way, but talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. I say so called, because every time the government wants to look at what I am doing it is in the name of winning the war. It is BS.

[KittyKares]

I hope there is never a National Human Identification System.

Are you of the conservative persuasion? That indeed is rare in this profession. I usually find it prudent to keep my comments at work in the neutral zone, which is why it is so freeing to turn into a Freeper after work and be able to let my hair down.

[Porterville]

This should not be a group. Books are not difficult to organize.

[rlmorel]

Bull. We are at war, and it is people like you who do not know it. Tough to have to parade the memory of a person who died to make the point with a pathetic excuse for a Marine like you who supposedly understands sacrifice. I'm sure a lot of Marines would appreciate hearing someone like you refer to a "so called war" they are fighting and dying in.

Pathetic indeed.

[barj]

I am of the liberal persuasion, that is, in the classical sense as defined by F.A. Hayek. I believe in liberty.

[VeniVidiVici]

Why does anyone even go to a library anymore? I got a card when I first moved back here from Germany 13 years ago. I think I went once.

They are the first to go when budget cuts start.

Close 'em all.

[barj]

The so called war is the one they alledgedly battle here. "Let's restrict you, let's look at your records. You don't mind. It will help catch the bad guys." That is all bs.

"Is life so dear or peace so sweet" or the love for a friend so precious "as to be purchased in the bonds and chains of slavery?" Your answer seems to be YES. I say NO.

[barj]

So one's right to organize or assemble should be based on the importance or difficulty of one's profession? The ALA is within the rights to do what they do.

[barj]

Close 'em all?

Nice attitude. Returned from Germany? Did you learn book burning when you were there?

[Dave Olson]

But to piss away our freedoms and rights to fight this so called war is silly. The more restrictive and invasive we allow the government to become, the more they, that is the terrorists win.

"So called war"? In 1996, OBL issued a declaration of war against the Americans who were in Saudi Arabia. In 1998, he extended that declaration against all Americans everywhere, and called on Muslims all over the world to kill as many of us as possible.

As a libertarian myself, I'm uneasy about government's interfering into people's private lives. But I don't see that happening with the Patriot Act, and anything short of our deaths does not give the terrorists their win.

[VeniVidiVici]

I didn't say burn them, numnut, I said close them.

You want them, pay for them yourself.

[Porterville]

M&M's are more difficult to organize than books.

[KittyKares]

I believe in liberty, too, which is why I am a conservative. I get tired of liberals forcing me to pay for their social experiments and censoring my speech with their political correctness.

[freepatriot32]

Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here

[KittyKares]

Try your local library again. Times have changed, and libraries are changing with them. My library has free computer classes, free online access to full text magazine and newspaper articles, free video and DVD borrowing privileges, books on cassette or CD for long commutes, free public programs such as a lecture on what is stem cell research, writing workshops -- and a strong desire to help each person get an answer to his or her question. More and more libraries are even offering free downloadable audiobooks, ebooks, or music.

Many people don't know that they can request that a library purchase a book. If you see too many liberal books on the shelves, request a conservative title--don't just shun the library. Ask for the titles that you want to see. In my personal experience, more liberals than conservatives will make purchase requests. Because I have a limited budget and also need to provide what my community wants, sometimes I am hoping a conservative will come in and ask for a particular title, but rarely do they. Be more proactive.

[Miami Vice]

"These agencies are effectively on fishing expeditions, which the constitution strictly forbids."

Since when are librarians Constitutional experts???

[Alia]

Public libraries, are not "privately owned or run". What a hoot they think they are above "ordinary" operations in the US.

[rlmorel]

The so called war is the one they alledgedly battle here.

The war is going on everywhere. In 2004 alone, US Special Forces carried out operations in 150 countries.

We get to carry out our normal lives while others sacrifice their normal lives on our behalf. I believe we owe them the "sacrifice" of allowing a government agency which is chasing a hot lead to examine a public computer, paid for with taxpayer's money.

In an open and free society (which is what the USA is, in contrary to what many who decry the "loss of rights" think) with porous borders and a non-homogeneous population, we are at risk. The people who attacked us on 9/11 have shown there is no depth to which they will not plunge to attain their aims. If they had nuclear weapons they would have used them.

You are of the the opinion that allowing the search of a computer in a public library which may contain data that might lead to the capture of one of these animals is the Mother's Milk that leads to heroin addiction. You believe that begrudging one step of hard earned liberty leads inexorably down a slippery slope to fascism.

I believe that attitude is what contributed to our blindness on 9/11, and it was caused by people who share your opinion in this. And the most galling thing is that the very people who criticize the government most vociferously for "not connecting the dots" are the same ones who lament that allowing a search like the one described above will lead to US citizens being incarcerated in Soviet style gulags.

[rlmorel]

I disagree. I go the library all the time. I think, by and large, Librarians do a good job and get the most bang for the buck on behalf of the people who use them.

I don't think libraries are obsolete.

On the other hand, in my home state of Massachusetts, some of them regard themselves as the last bastion of defense against a fascist government. They need to read this book:

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

"My library goes out of its way to try not to have any records so that if a subpoena is issued, they will have nothing to provide."

That's nice to know--that your library "goes out of its way," i.e., makes every effort, to cover terrorists' tracks. That arguably meets Article III, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution's definition of treason, specifically the part about "giving aid and comfort."

[muawiyah]

Yeah, "they" had all the information "they" needed to prevent 9/11, but a narrow-minded "record protector" decided "they" couldn't talk to each other.

'nuff said. You'all can't be trusted.

[barj]

If M&Ms are more easy to organize, why can't one earn an MM&MS (Masters of M&M Sorting) instead of an MLS (Masters of Library Science). Collections of thousands, if not millions of volumes of texts require some sort of management. Most M&M junkies even realize this.


The vociferousness that many of you display is comical. You parade the dead and those working to defend the country as some sort of saints. You criticise Sheehan while acting like her, wrapping yourselves in the flag or images of those who have died (Yeah, I think she's an idiot too, but why mimic an idiot). If anyone disagrees with you, they are criminals, stupid, "can't be trusted," and should somehow be removed from this society/country. You criticise the Muslim extremist who kill those of not similar faction, yet your rhetoric sounds strangely familiar to their rantings. Nice attitudes, so much for Christianity, understanding, forgiveness, and most important, reasonable dialogue and debate. You folks are more inundated and influenced by the mass media than you realize.


"You want them, pay for them yourself" Funny that isn't the attitude when I say chuck the FDA or a myriad of other government agencies. You folks want the comfort of the illusion of the services they pretend to provide. What you forget is that NOT ALL libraries are public. These boys want access to information from private libraries. How is that different than them reviewing your private reading material? The government cannot protect you, only you can by being vigilant and well armed and by keeping government out of your lives.

And the argument - But if it saves just one life? Give me a break! "anything short of our deaths does not give the terrorists their win." and "we owe them the "sacrifice" of allowing a government agency [access to our lives]", and "we are at risk. The people who attacked us on 9/11 have shown there is no depth to which they will not plunge to attain their aims. If they had nuclear weapons they would have used them." All of these ring like cry babies saying if is saves just one.

These are common pleas to give up liberites in a vain attempt at personal comfort and security. Don't you think door to door searches during the American Revolution would have rooted out some sympathisers and collaborators? Why wasn't it done on large scale? Because the liberty of the individual was more valued than security. Sure there is no depth the bad guys wouldn't sink to, but that doesn't mean we should follow them there, we are the road to reducing ourselves to a fight of our form of totalitarianism being "better" than theirs. Sure we are at risk, but that is the cost of liberty. It may cost your life, it may cost mine, but that is the cost. And yes, I believe that sacrificing one step of hard earned liberty leads inexorably down a slippery slope to fascism - ABSOLUTELY! Our fore fathers were upset about a 10% tax, tell me we haven't gone screaming down a steep teflon coated slope. Tell me anything the government has become involved with that they have maintained a hands off attitude. Franklin was right, "Those willing to sacrifice a little liberty to gain a little security deserve neither."

"Since when are librarians Constitutional experts" We should all be. Those who don't exercise their rights are doomed to loose them. Sound familiar? I think it was Jefferson. I'll tell you something else he said, All evil needs to exist is for good people to do nothing. I assume when they knock on your door to take your firearms you won't cite the second amendment, because afterall, you're no expert. Furthermore, it will make things safer, and isn't that what it's all about?

Thank you

[barj]

P.S. I liked your book.

[rlmorel]

Yes...for me 'Witness' was the linchpin that changed my opinion about many things, most notably the American left and the media.

But it didn't change my opinion that societies lacking the willpower to keep themselves from being eaten from within do not survive.

Since we openly allow people from all over the world to come here with little or no documentation, these people are all basically from within our society, if we cannot distinguish them. If we do nothing about it, in the current climate, America will finished as a nation.

The fact that you are offended that someone has to point out that people died to precipitate this situation says more about your point of view than it does about mine. There are a lot of people who forget that there are many things precipitated by the events of 9/11. They think this horrible crisis of FBI agents needing access to a public computer happened in a vacuum, or that the government was just waiting for an excuse to do it. These are the same people who never ask themselves the question: "If 9/11 had not happened, would we be in Iraq right now in the capacity we are?"

It is sad indeed that some people have to REMIND other people that there is such a thing as cause and effect. There are people out there saying "We spend too much time thinking about 9/11, we should put it behind us..." You certainly sound like one of those people who think post-9/11 will be the same as pre-9/11. Sorry to have to be the one to throw the picture in your face of an American who died that day. But perhaps you are not one of those people.

You may be living in a utopian reality, or maybe perhaps your "2 million people killed rather than 2000" statement was just rhetoric, but for a supposed conservative you are displaying all the hallmarks of the opposite state of mind.

Liberalism has an unattainable utopian future in which any means justifies the ends to achieve it, including a supposed society where nobody is going to fly planes into buildings, and closing your eyes to the likelihood of it happening is just as important as finding the likely perpetrators of such an action.

[Dave Olson]

And yes, I believe that sacrificing one step of hard earned liberty leads inexorably down a slippery slope to fascism - ABSOLUTELY!

While that could happen, it's certainly not inexorable. Abe Lincoln suspended habeas corpus. Habeas corpus has since been reinstated. Woodrow Wilson's Sedition Act was repealed about two years after it was enacted. FDR interned Americans of Japanese descent. That isn't happening anymore.

Franklin was right, "Those willing to sacrifice a little liberty to gain a little security deserve neither."

I'm a fan of Franklin, and in fact, he and I share the same birthday. But I think that quote of his is overstated. It implies that maximum liberty is had with no security. And that is demonstrably false.

[mysterio]

The more restrictive and invasive we allow the government to become, the more they, that is the terrorists win.

I agree with you. Furthermore, if the "patriot" act had been suggested by a democrat instead of a republican, everyone else here would agree with you, too.

[barj]

I appreciate your polite reply.

Yes, our borders are porous. That is a problem. It allowed my family to enter in the early 1900's. Identifying trouble makers is problematic, always has been; I think, in part, that is the average citizens' job to be aware; nothing wrong in snitching on bad guys. More people will die, best prepare for it, that is the cost of the way we live (sorry to repeat myself). I realize things will not be the same, however I do not hink Hussien's model for keeping control of a populace as a quality example. I value freedom more than safety, PERIOD. It wasn't mere rhetoric with Patrick Henry and I'd like to think it isn't with me. There are countries that are more restrictive than ours and that, at least theoretically, should be safer. I could always move, should I desire that amount of participation in my life. YOU'RE RIGHT, we should not forget. You are also correct that the Utopian model is not achievable, but that doesn't mean you don't strive for it. It is too easy to go the other way. Every year, volumes and volumes of laws and regs are passed. I simply say we need no more.

Thanks again.

[barj]

Interesting point. We do tend to be a bit bellicose.

[VOA]

bump

[barj]

Some good points, thanks. I should remember nothing is absolute.

"It implies that maximum liberty is had with no security. And that is demonstrably false."

Perhaps, but maximum liberty is LESS secure.
But, is maximum security void of liberty? Probably, very nearly.

[rlmorel]

You're welcome. As well, I appreciate the polite response and I apologize for the tone of my response initially.

Your initial posting was worthy of my disagreement, and I should have not jumped on you as quickly as I did. I generally try to be civil in these forums, usually with success, but I have my hot button issues like everyone else.

Mine happens to be 9/11, the state of war we are in, and the relationship between the two.

[barj]

I sure appreciate that. We all have our sore spots I'm pretty thick skinned, so don't sweat it. I am a hopeless smart a** though, so please forgive in advance.

Personally, I'm a fan of the Afgan and Iraq efforts. I do not think they are really about combatting terrorism, that is only a small part of it. SHould they be successful in creating a freer country in the middle east, great. The real cause is to get a non OPEC country, Iraq, producing and transporting (bring the pipe line through Afgan and like countries down through Iraq) large quantities of oil. Blow the top off prices, blow the maarket apart. Destroy or seriously harm OPEC. This would give a huge shot in the arm of our country and style of life. More shockingly, however, is I believe servicemen's lives are worth this: Put another way, our way of life and its improvement IS worth fighting and dying for.

A little weird, I know.

[VOA]

I spent a few weeks visiting members of my family in Columbia, MO. They enjoy
the city,but grit their teeth at the liberal nuttiness invading the
place via the University of Missouri.

BUT, on a couple of visits to the CITY library, I was shocked at the balance
of the catalog; in fact it seemed to be a little balanced to the right.
And full of all sorts of media to be checked out, even some that would
drive the ACLU nuts, like "The Question of God" DVD.

Sure beats the heck out the stuff I endure during a visit to the bookstores
of Santa Monica, CA!