Are 'Police State' Theorists Just Drama Queens?

Insight ^ | 11/25/02 | James Lacey

[Jean S]

Since 9/11 there has been a lot of ranting from the left that America is well on the way to becoming a police state. According to this line of thought John Ashcroft and his evil minions are working overtime to smash all dissent and to deprive Americans of their civil liberties. Such near-great celebrities as Susan Sarandon have taken to the airwaves to announce, "We're living in lockdown."

What more evidence is required?

Countries earn the sordid title of "police state" because they have achieved a certain level of repression that ensures only the very brave or the very stupid ever will speak out against the government. Since Susan Sarandon decided to speak out while in England she cannot truly be considered brave, though it is much too early to rule out stupid.

If America is well down the road toward becoming a police state the proof of it should be all around us. Let's look at the evidence.

• Number of New Yorkers attending October antiwar rally in Central Park: 15,000
  
  
• Number of New York antiwar protestors arrested in October: 0
  
  
• Number of times the antiwar (and anti-everything-else-American) Revolution Bookstore has been shut down: 0
  
  
• Number of Revolution bookstore employees arrested for anti-Bush agitation: 0
  
  
• Number of American-born individuals held without charges as enemy combatants: 2
  
  
• Percentage of Americans held as enemy combatants: 0.0000000074 percent
  
  
• Number of American-enemy combatants held without a lawyer or a judicial hearing: 0
  
  
• What it takes to be held as an enemy combatant: planning to blow up a nuclear power plant or being found with a weapon fighting American soldiers
  
  
• Number of newspapers shut down for dissenting with the government position on Iraq: 0
  
  
• Number of commentators arrested for expressing a dissenting opinion: 0
  
  
• Fate of most outspoken celebrities who are against current government policies:
  
  • Susan Sarandon: Still free, still rich, not yet blacklisted
    
  • Alec Baldwin: Still free, still rich, not yet blacklisted
    
  • Leo DiCaprio: Still free, still rich, not yet blacklisted
    
  • Barbara Streisand: Still free, still rich, not yet blacklisted
  
  
• Number of people reported tortured by the Ashcroft Justice Department: 0
  
  
• Number of times U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth says the Clinton-era Justice Department lied to obtain search warrants against American citizens: 75
  
  
• Number of times Judge Lamberth says Achcroft's Justice Department has lied to obtain search warrants: 0
  
  
• Number of U.S. municipalities suffering under martial law: 0
  
  
• Most recent use of the military for police work inside the United States: assisting in the hunt for the D.C. sniper
  
  
• Number of people arrested for anti-American activities since 9/11: 0 (This number does not include the two noncombatants listed above.)
  
  
• Number of congressman who on a visit to Iraq potentially committed treason by giving aid and comfort to the enemy: 2 (Some would say three.)
  
  
• Number of congressmen returning from Iraq who were arrested for treason: 0
  
  
• Number of potentially treasonous congressmen who are running again for office: 2 (Some would say three.)
  
  
• Number of senators who voted against Iraqi Resolution: 31
  
  
• Number of congressmen voting against the Iraqi Resolution: 133
  
  
• Number of senators and congressmen arrested for not towing the line: 0
  
  
• Percentage of network-news coverage that has been antiwar: 72 percent
  
  
• Number of government-supported radio and television networks: 2 (PBS and NPR)
  
  
• Number of government-supported radio and television networks using the airwaves to support the government's position on Iraq: 0
  
  
• Number of political prisoners arrested by the Ashcroft Justice Department: 0
  
  
• Number of political prisoners held in U.S. jails: 4 (most commonly listed)
  
  
• Charges American political prisoners were convicted of:
  
  • Mumia Abu-Jamal: murder of a police officer
    
  • Leonard Peltier: murder of two FBI agents
    
  • Kathy Boudin: murder of two police officers
    
  • David Gilbert: murder of a guard while robbing a Brinks armored car

The cumulative evidence appears to indicate that we either are not in a police state or that John Ashcroft is the most inept secret policeman of all time. Some on the left would argue the latter. To appease them, I will give Mr. Ashcroft one more chance to enforce the principles inherent in a police state.

As of this moment, and for the rest of the week, I am calling for the nonviolent overthrow of the U.S. government (advocating the violent overthrow of the government actually is illegal). If this column fails to appear next week you can assume that storm troopers have dragged me off to Leavenworth. But, frankly, I think I would have a better chance of being arrested if I were to smoke a cigarette in a New York bar.

James Lacey is a colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve and a New York-based columnist with expertise in finance and military affairs.

[PatrioticAmerican]

How many people have had their homes broke into last year by SWAT teams at the wrong house or using a bad warrant?

How many cops have automatic weapons in the trunk of their cruiser?

If an automatic weapon is only useful for killing large amounts of people, and we should ban them because of that, why do cops have them? Do they need to kill large amounts of people?

How many legal cases are filed against cops for violent use of force?

Howe many cops are actually prosecuted for assault when they beat a suspect, instead of just "transferred"?

Whena gun is involved in any situation, why is it that the person with the gun is autmatically arrested?

Why does the government maintain computer records of who buys weapons?

Why do the feds maintain intel on citizens who are not suspects in a crime?

[eno_]

You are thinking along the correct lines. No, FISA and most post-9/11 changes do not herald a new police state. OTOH, it is completely good and rational for everyone to be on alert for their privacy. There has been much erosion of privacy and civil liberties BEFORE 9/11. Roll back that erosion, and people will be much more accepting of security-related changes in how much privacy they have. Does the gopvernment deserve to be criticised? Yes! Government is making the mistake of taking without giving any counter-balancing privacy back to citizens. With a small amount of effort, the storm over the Patriot Act could have been avaoided.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Do you expect me to believe that 50,000 people turned over their AR-15s?

[justshutupandtakeit]

There are many citizens selling out their nation or attempting to destroy it. John Muhammed for one.

[dirtboy]

There are many citizens selling out their nation or attempting to destroy it. John Muhammed for one.

And had the cops actually used the database they created for the investigation, they would have nailed him by October 8th. And had the INS followed its own guidelines, Malvo would have been deported when he tried to enter this country as a stowaway.

We don't need to monitor citizens to this extent. Basic law enforcement and enforcement of existing immigration and visa rules would go a long way.

[justshutupandtakeit]

I wasn't speaking of Malvo. But Muhammed, Jose Padilla, Jihad Johnny are American citizens. There are thousands of other dangerous traitors in our midst.

[DCPatriot]

WOW!

Thanks for sharing. ;^)

[dirtboy]

I wasn't speaking of Malvo. But Muhammed, Jose Padilla, Jihad Johnny are American citizens. There are thousands of other dangerous traitors in our midst.

And let's catch American citizens attempting terrorism while keeping existing liberties in place, by having the feds make better use of the existing data stream, instead of demanding more data when they can't handle what they're getting already. The 9/11 hijackers were foreign. Most of Al Queda is foreign. Let's keep more of an eye on them.

[DCPatriot]

Regretfully, you're right. ;^(

However, all the personal information about me that you just felt the need to display here in FreeRepublic...while embarrassing a bit, is not going to get be arrested for acitivites against the United States.

Hell, they'd be glad that I'm here before it's all done.

God Bless America!

[TomB]

You are more understanding than I am.

[Admin Moderator]

That was extremely uncool. Do not ever do that again. If you wanted to make the point, you could have Freepmailed that information to him. Thank you.

[Freemeorkillme]

http://www.donath.org/
Carl Donath

[freepatriot32]

go to www.allewislive.com (better known as grandpa munster)and listen to his radio show everyday oh wait you cant the goverment had it shut it down before the office of homeland security officially existed

[ctdonath2]

There are numerous FR threads addressing the situation. Not sure how many actually complied. The total number was far from trivial. Point is that once a perceived "terrorist" attack began, the information available (very inconvenient and limited, but still available) was substantially abused by the feds...how much bigger a problem when the TIA database makes such searches easy.

[ctdonath2]

Yes, my post #20 was extremely uncool. The moderator's deletion and chastising is completely warranted. Pulling such detailed personal information together for display to unknown strangers is A Really Bad Thing. Such actions should be rapidly shut down, and the perpetrators (me, in this case) should be told in no uncertain terms to never try such a thing again.

Which is precisely my point about the Total Information Awareness program. The federal gov't wants to do the same thing in far more detail and for every person in the country. Such a system is extremely uncool times 300,000,000 precisely because of how such consolidated data can be abused, and comparable systems have indeed rapidly led to police states in the past.

Juxtaposition: I get severly chastized for pulling together a little publicly & easily available info on someone who openly states he has no problem with the gov't doing far more on everyone whether they like it or not.

Sure, I deserved it; does not the gov't deserve more so for doing the same on a far grander scale? DCPatriot, did you call the moderator in on post #20? if so, why shouldn't I do the same on the proposed Total Information Awareness system?

[justshutupandtakeit]

I have no problem with watching the Islamaniacs more closely but in other to do so there will be extra-ordinary measures required. Those measures are the ones you oppose. However, they will not greatly impose on law abiding citizens (or even non-citizens.)

[DCPatriot]

Thanks, donath. You seem to be a very nice person. Point taken and no offense taken. ;^)

[dirtboy]

there will be extra-ordinary measures required. Those measures are the ones you oppose. However, they will not greatly impose on law abiding citizens (or even non-citizens.)

Yeah, just like the income tax was only supposed to impact a small percentage of the highest-income taxpayers. Or the Social Security number was never going to be used for anything but Social Security. I could go on, but I think you understand why I have a hard time believing your assertion here...

[DCPatriot]

Thanks for calling him on releasing personal information about me in the forum. I just noticed that you cited him.

[DCPatriot]

"...DCPatriot, did you call the moderator in on post #20? if so, why shouldn't I do the same on the proposed Total Information Awareness system?"

No sir, I was so shocked at what you posted, the thought never occurred to me to push the abuse button.

Thankfully, specific replies can be deleted without wasting the entire thread.

And, I can't answer your question because the TIA system didn't do anything like you did.