Posted on 09/28/2001 5:45:29 PM PDT by Starmaker
Let me start by saying that I believe John Ashcroft is a decent man. The minute he was sworn in he elevated the office of Attorney General from what it had been reduced to under Reno¹s reign. From what I have seen, he appears to be a principled, likable man who has only the best of intentions for America...and that is exactly what makes me uneasy.
We have heard it said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. It is an old cliché, and I usually try to avoid clichés like the plague, but it is definitely appropriate. If Congress gives John Ashcroft what he wants, we will be taking yet another step (or two or three) closer to becoming a police state.
Now I know that many of you may think I'm overreacting, but take a look at what Mr. Ashcroft wants. First and foremost on his agenda is to get Congress to allow law enforcement agencies to obtain warrants that would allow them to record all the telephone numbers a suspect calls wherever he moves throughout the country. As it stands now, such warrants are limited to certain jurisdictions.
He wants the FBI and other agencies granted the power to seize a suspect's voicemail messages. He is also calling for judges to issue nationwide search warrants that would force Internet service providers to turn over their records so that a suspect's incoming and outgoing e-mail messages can be monitored.
Ashcroft is also looking to bypass the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution that prohibits "unreasonable searches and seizures." He wants prosecutors to be allowed to use against U.S. citizens wiretap information gathered by foreign governments, including information obtained by means that in this country would be considered unconstitutional and inadmissible in court.
Our Attorney General¹s heart may be in the right place but his Orwellian proposals demonstrate that even the best of intentions can be harmful. They also demonstrate what a nervous, high-strung public huddling together for protection is willing to tolerate in the name of national security.
Having Americans united is all well and good, but with great numbers can come a false sense of security. Critical thinking is often sacrificed for the sake of acceptance within the group. Individually, Americans can be very cautious and discerning, but collectively, they can be easily manipulated by their government. To quote Tommy Lee Jones in Men in Black, "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals..." And that is exactly the perception many politicians have.
Our elected officials know that if they can play upon our collective fears, they can force just about anything down our throats. This is evidenced by the intrusive laws that have come out of Washington, laws dictating everything from the amount of water we use when we flush our toilets to the kind of gun we can use to protect ourselves and our loved ones. Could it be that the good intentions of our leaders have come to be more trusted than our own thirst for freedom?
I believe that liberty must be preserved, not relinquished, in order to maintain a strong national security. The legislation proposed by John Ashcroft will result in nothing but the erosion of what liberty we have left.
One of the most prominent examples of good intentions gone awry is the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act that has been used to persecute anti-abortion protesters. What began as a weapon to fight organized crime turned out to be the perfect tool wielded by the proponents of infanticide to crack down on their moral and political opposition.
The federal RICO statute was part of the 1970 Organized Crime Control Act that was intended to impose harsh penalties on individuals belonging to an organization that was engaged in both legal and illegal activities. It was mainly designed as a clever little scheme to ensnare members of the Mafia who were able to escape conviction on more serious charges. However, as we have seen with so many other laws based on good intentions, it has been twisted and used against ordinary citizens who are guilty of nothing but simply exercising their right of free speech.
It is not difficult to imagine John Ashcroft¹s anti-terrorist wiretapping laws being applied in a similar fashion. Those laws could be used against pro-life activists who, while associated with "radical fundamentalist" groups like National Right to Life, may be viewed as potential terrorist bombers of abortion clinics. Do not be fooled into thinking it won't happen.
Government based on good intentions leads to oppressive policies and tyrannical laws. This is especially true when there is a national crisis and people are too scared to think for themselves. If we want to remain free we cannot allow our fears to get the better of us.
Mr. Ashcroft, I implore you to reconsider your strategy on fighting terrorism. Imposing laws that will expand the already questionable constitutional powers of law enforcement agencies will only have adverse effects. You have even admitted to the House Judiciary Committee that the laws you are proposing would not have prevented the attacks in New York and Washington, D.C. Please understand that any reckless legislation you support now can and will come back to haunt us. The remedy for terrorism is not tyranny, no matter how good and noble your intentions are.
And Mr. Ashcroft is foreman of the road crew.
The erosion of our liberties comes swiftly with the
tidal wave of fear.
It's scary.
...Allow domestic law enforcement authorities to obtain information gathered by foreign intelligence agencies even if its ''significant purpose'' was to pursue a criminal investigation rather than suspected espionage. For the first time, the rules that govern foreign-intelligence gathering, which carry a lower ''probable cause'' standard, would be applied to US citizens.
Excuse me, am I the only one uncomfortable with possible Russian (Gulag-Style) evidence being utilized to deprive US Citizens of Freedom?
"If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way, which the constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for, though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.
Good Thoughts.
SM, I sure hope so, but I have some SERIOUS doubts. Ashcroft is not in this position to make "mistakes". And, the folks who oversee his department know better too. Peace and love, George.
A Little Libertarian Advice
by Brian Carlson
An organization that is not explicitly right-wing will become left-wing over time.'
~ John O’Sullivan – National Review Editor at Large
Readers of National Review will recognize O’Sullivan’s Law, which governs the inevitable leftward drift of all but the most rigid and vigilant organizations. It’s the law of compromise and consensus, as founding principles are de-emphasized, then abandoned, and eventually forgotten. Its implications are vast; even our cherished, if misunderstood "democracy," is socialism in its adolescence. O’Sullivan’s Law necessitates and makes urgent NR’s supposed mission to "stand athwart history yelling ‘Stop!"
Herewith, the similar "Carlson’s Law" and its implications for conservatives:
An organization that is not explicitly libertarian will voluntarily and irreversibly surrender its liberties to the State
It’s really Orwell’s Law. Eventually we’ll love Big Brother, if not for gifts conferred, then for threats withdrawn. Years from now, the "Office of Homeland Security" will likely resemble the "War on Drugs" in its scope and in the success of its stated objectives. And "conservatives" Bush, Ashcroft, and Bennett will broadcast their smiling approval from the safety of a gated community. Conservatives were once anti-State, the way Republicans were once anti-tax. How long before they too are viewed by a cynical public as "paying lip-service" to civil liberties?
It’s worth remembering that there are no temporary measures, no sunset provisions. All services are essential. With each surrender, by failing to check its momentum, conservatives aid the force that will one day smother them.
And if you ain’t part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. October 2, 2001
I find it phenomenal that men who allegedly find Christ their "favorite philosopher" are not held to a higher standard of cognizance and are able to score points by clothing their Alchemy of Pragmatism in a smattering of Scripture.
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.