[Nettime-bold] FW: [EDITOR_RMNEWS] Can Freedom be Exchanged for Security?

["Steve McAlexander" <mcalexander@veriomail.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Can Freedom be Exchanged for Security?[Steve said]  Or Should it? 
By Ron Paul (R-TX) 11.27.01 



It's easy for elected officials in Washington to tell the American
people that the government will do whatever it takes to defeat
terrorism. Such assurances inevitably are followed by proposals
either to restrict the constitutional liberties of the American
people or spend vast sums from the federal treasury. 
The history of the 20th century shows that the Constitution is
violated most often by Congress during times of crisis; accordingly,
most of our worst unconstitutional agencies and programs began during
the two world wars and the Depression. Ironically, the Constitution
itself was conceived in a time of great crisis. 
The founders intended its provision to place inviolable restrictions
on what the federal government could do even in times of great
distress. America must guard against current calls for government to
violate the Constitution- break the law- in the name of law
enforcement. 

The "anti-terrorism" legislation recently passed by Congress
demonstrates how well-meaning politicians make shortsighted mistakes
in a rush to respond to a crisis. Most of its provisions were never
carefully studied by Congress, nor was sufficient time taken to
debate the bill despite its importance. No testimony was heard from
privacy experts or others from fields outside of law enforcement. 
Normal congressional committee and hearing processes were suspended.
In fact, the final version of the bill was not made available to
members before the vote! These political games should not be
tolerated by the American public, especially when precious freedoms
are at stake. 

Almost all of the new laws focus on American citizens rather than
potential foreign terrorists. For example, the definition of
"terrorism" for federal criminal purposes has been greatly expanded;
you now may be considered a terrorist if you belong to a
pro-constitution group, a citizens militia, or various pro-life
organizations. Legitimate protest against the government could place
you (and tens of thousands of other Americans) under federal
surveillance. Similarly, your internet use can be monitored without
your knowledge, and your internet provider can be forced to hand over
user information to law enforcement without a warrant or subpoena. 

The bill also greatly expands the use of traditional surveillance
tools, including wiretaps, search warrants, and subpoenas. Probable
cause standards for these tools are relaxed or even eliminated in
some circumstances; warrants become easier to obtain and can be
executed without your knowledge; and wiretaps can be placed on you
without a court order. In fact, the FBI and CIA now can tap phones or
computers nationwide without even demonstrating that a particular
phone or computer is being used by a criminal suspect. 

The biggest problem with these new law enforcement powers is that
they bear little relationship to fighting terrorism. Surveillance
powers are greatly expanded, while checks and balances on government
are greatly reduced. Most of the provisions have been sought after by
domestic law enforcement agencies for years, not to fight terrorism,
but rather to increase their police power over the American people.
There is no evidence that our previously-held civil liberties posed a
barrier to the effective tracking or prosecution of terrorists. The
federal government has made no showing that it failed to detect or
prevent the recent terrorist strikes because of the civil liberties
that will be compromised by this new legislation. 

In his speech to the joint session of Congress following the
September 11th attacks, President Bush reminded all of us that the
United States outlasted and defeated Soviet totalitarianism in the
last century. The numerous internal problems in the former Soviet
Union- its centralized economic planning and lack of free markets,
its repression of human liberty, its excessive militarization- all
led to its inevitable collapse. The lack of freedom in the Soviet
Union, rather than any foreign enemy, was responsible for its
downfall. We must be vigilant to resist the rush toward
ever-increasing state control of our society, so that our own
government does not become a greater threat to our freedoms than any
foreign terrorist.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
EDITOR_RMNEWS-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBPAQ/4xzAJfUe8uFiEQLmbwCdHaPLpIZl7GwdjjYlKou4T1vqeDAAniXy
T8p9way9+8U4KRmEwXJVuBrb
=EE+P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold