Editor's Note: Not every enemy of this country is a
foreigner. The enemies of this country are those who want to
chip away at the Bill of Rights, eliminate the Electoral College,
spend astronomical amounts of money, and turn the United States
into a police state, using the September 11th tragedy as an excuse. If
you value your right to privacy, this is the time to be very concerned.
(Each of these links opens up a new browser window
so you can pick up where you left off.)
All the material about the USA Patriot Act has been moved
the other hand, if you're primarily concerned about privacy issues, start
New York Times opinion writer wants to do away with the Electoral College. Priceless
republican relic. First off, kids, the United States is not a "democracy." We are a
representative democracy better yet defined as a constitutional republic. Learned students of history
that the Founders and Framers were, they knew a pure democracy was no better than anarchy. … Prematurely
released exit polls conducted by the media have far more to do with retarding voter turnout than the
Freedom for Safety: An old
trade — and a useless one. Within days of the attacks, Attorney General John
Ashcroft pushed Congress to pass expansive anti-terrorism legislation that was a lawman’s wish list (and
not very different from the regular requests made by lawmen before 9/11).
hysteria? Driving through downtown Washington, D.C., a few weeks ago, I asked
myself: What's happened to the character of the American people? There were
barricaded landmarks, armed guards and people waiting to be searched. Several weeks
ago, I visited downtown Philadelphia in the vicinity of Independence Hall. Again
there were barricades, armed guards and visitors waiting in line.
more bureaucracy mean more security? When America had an energy crisis,
our leaders responded by creating the Department of Energy. When we perceived serious
failures by our schools, the Department of Education was formed. Likewise, the terrorist
threat that became apparent last Sept. 11 prompted the Bush administration to propose a
Department of Homeland Security. But our experience with those other national
emergencies raises a question: Why bother?
You Call This a
War? The London terror bombings make one thing clear: the United States and the
United Kingdom are never going to win the "war on terrorism." The reason is simple: it
isn't really a war. And nobody can win or lose it. We should stop talking about it
as if it were a war. It's a clash of wills. The enemy is obscure, but can't be
fought or defeated as if he were a state. He has no vital secrets or single mastermind
that can be found by, say, taking, questioning, and torturing captives.
FBI, Please Protect Us
from Terrorists and the ACLU. One can only hope that the ACLU will now finally
join those of us who have always opposed the entire slate of new federal police powers enacted
since 9/11, which have inflicted great damage on the Bill of Rights and American liberties and
been unnecessary, ineffective, and counterproductive in combating terrorism.
war: we need to name our enemy. Are we fighting a war
against "terrorism," as we're told ad nauseum, or are we really
fighting a war specifically against radical Islamists, as some have pointed out in
recent weeks, defying the political-correctness fascists and inviting applause from
Americans desperate for truth?
Franks Doubts Constitution Will Survive WMD Attack. Already, critics of
the U.S. Patriot Act, rushed through Congress in the wake of the September 11
attacks, have argued that the law aims to curtail civil liberties and sets a dangerous
precedent. But Franks' scenario goes much further. He is the first
high-ranking official to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in
favor of a military form of government.
odds against terror: The American response to tightening up after London has been
reflexive and idiotic: random bag checks in the New York subways. Random meaning that
the people stopped are to be chosen numerically. One in every 5 or 10 or 20. This is an
obvious absurdity and everyone knows it. It recapitulates the appalling waste of effort and
resources we see at airports every day when, for reasons of political correctness, 83-year-old
grandmothers from Poughkeepsie are required to remove their shoes in the search for jihadists
hungering for paradise.
George Orwell's 1984 Become A Reality In 2004? The current edition
of Insight magazine features an article in which the former commander of the military's
Central Command, General Tommy Franks, warns that constitutional government could be
subject to a sudden demise if another major terrorist attack took place in America.
The FBI has not
been here. Librarians, who can be required by the FBI to submit
library records of private citizens under the PATRIOT Act — and who are
prohibited from making these requests public — have invented some clever,
legal strategies to fight back.
The O.J. Simpson
Case and the War on Terrorism: Since the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, many conservative lawyers and pundits have repeatedly raised the specter of
the Simpson verdict to argue that America's civilian criminal justice system is
broken — and that people accused of terrorist offenses ought to be tried before
It's Not Just About Terrorists. In
the name of catching terrorists, the federal government is rapidly establishing program after
program to monitor law-abiding American citizens. Long-standing wish lists of government officials
and special interests for expanded government surveillance of ordinary Americans are being trotted
out daily, wrapped in fine-sounding phrases. … These measures seek to establish federal
surveillance of law-abiding people on a scale previously unimaginable in America.
A Conservative Stand On Civil
Liberties Issues: Just before his retirement, [Dick Armey] discovered that the Justice Department,
as part of its drive to protect us from Osama bin Laden, was proposing a massive block surveillance system not
that different from the one utilized by Cuba's Fidel Castro to control his citizens. He was appalled that
we might actually encourage neighbors to spy on one another in the name of protecting us. He helped kill it.
Violating the Constitution With an Illegal
War: The last time Congress declared war was on December 11, 1941, against Germany in
response to its formal declaration of war against the United States. This was accomplished with wording
that took less than one-third of a page, without any nitpicking arguments over precise language, yet it was a
clear declaration of who the enemy was and what had to be done.
Why This War? When the
reasons that are given for war are so feeble, you can be sure they aren't the real reasons.
Anonymity in America: Does National Security
Preclude It? Anonymous speech has proud roots stretching to the origins of America.
Gentlemen calling themselves "Publius" wrote the Federalist Papers. Thomas Paine's Common Sense was
signed by "An Englishman." Today, computer programs that allow us to encrypt emails—to scramble
them such that only the intended "key-holding" recipient can decipher the message—represent perhaps the
newest incarnation of the old tradition of speaking both freely and anonymously.
President Bush Declares Another State of
Emergency: President Bush issued a new executive order declaring another state of national
emergency and invoking certain additional standby powers. President Bush relies on actions of the
United Nations asa principal source of his authority to defend the United States. This curious
practice perpetuates the approach taken by President Clinton. (This refers
My Wake-up Call: Watch For Another 9/11-WMD
Experience. Many Americans dismiss suspicion of their government as treasonous, and most believe
conspiracy to be impossible "because someone would talk." There is no basis in any known fact for this
opinion. According to polls, 36% of the American people disbelieve the 9/11 Commission Report.
Despite this lack of confidence, and despite the numerous omissions and errors in the report, it has proven
impossible to have an independent investigation of 9/11 or to examine the official explanation in public
debate. Even experts and people with a lifetime of distinguished public service are dismissed as
"conspiracy theorists," "kooks," and "traitors" if they question the official explanation of 9/11.
Strong words, but worth reading. Bush
Directive for a "Catastrophic Emergency" in America. The threat of a Second Al Qaeda "Attack on
America" is being used profusely by the Bush administration to galvanize public opinion in support of a global
military agenda. Known and documented, the "Islamic terror network" is a creation of the US intelligence
apparatus. The "war on terrorism" is bogus. The 911 narrative as conveyed by the 911 Commission
report is fabricated. The Bush administration is involved in acts of cover-up and complicity at the
highest levels of government.
The "Use of the Armed Forces" in
America under a National Emergency. President Bush's National Security Presidential and Homeland
Directive (NSPD 51, HSPD 20) enacted on May 9, 2007, would essentially scrap Constitutional
government in the case of a so-called "Catastrophic Emergency". If an emergency situation were to be
called by the President, NSPD 51 would instate martial law under the authority of the White House and
the Department of Homeland Security.
More Listening by Law Enforcement Make America Safer? "Our
nation's time-tested freedoms can be eroded by the overzealous use of
electronic surveillance by law enforcement. … Wiretaps can be an important
and legitimate tool for law enforcement, but the importance of probable
cause and respecting privacy should not be lost."
(Not the exact title, but close enough): Report on
Federal Court Applications for Orders Authorizing Wiretaps: One
fact worth noting is that encryption was encountered in 16 wiretaps that were
terminated in 2001. However, in none of the cases involving encryption were law
enforcement officers unable to obtain the plain text of the communications that
had been intercepted. [PDF file]
Documentary film: 911: The
Road to Tyranny: The government needed a crisis to convince the
people to willingly give up their liberty in exchange for
safety. 911 the Road to Tyranny documents
the ruthless history of governments orchestrating terrorist attacks
against their own people to scare them into total submission.
shield for terrorists: President Bush should not be surprised if millions
of Americans come to the conclusion that the "war on terror" is nothing but a propaganda
cover for increasing the police powers of the government over native-born loyal citizens.
Give Terrorists Their Ultimate Victory!
In the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11, many
Americans are now in a frenzy over what to do to improve safety
and security. And as a result, many politicians are in a frenzy
on Capitol Hill, trying to figure out which American liberties
are expendable, and which ones are not. The correct answer, of
course, is NONE of our freedoms are worth sacrificing.
hold America hostage to civil rights: Here we go again. The decision to
hold Jose Padilla, AKA Abdullah al Muhajir, the so-called "dirty bomber," as
an "enemy combatant" has reignited the bonfire of hysteria over military tribunals
and civil rights.
Powers Without War: All of these expanded government powers are
justified as special emergency measures during wartime. But that is
precisely the problem. The nation is not at war — not officially.
more undeclared wars: America is being stampeded into a
new undeclared war, against Iraq. Thus it is a time for truth – a time
for Congress to do its duty, and debate and decide on war or peace.
Say "Anti-Terrorism" Provisions are Unconstitutional: Four
representatives and one senator voted against the "anti-terrorism bill"
signed into law by President Bush Oct. 26, but what is potentially more
noteworthy than the fact that only five members of Congress voted against
the bill, is which five members cast those votes and why.
Anti-Hoax Terrorism Law Considered: Justice Department
prosecutors and investigators say they need a tough
new federal law to stop the thousands of terrorist hoaxes that
began after the first anthrax death in Florida. But doubts are
coming from both sides of the political aisle.
and the NRA: I thought
the NRA was about maintaining the Constitution and the Second
Amendment. Maybe not. Hanging on to one small part of the Constitution
is not enough anymore. ALL of that document matters or
none of it matters.
a minute, please. Somebody, or several somebodies, are
suggesting that since the FBI and other intelligence agencies
can't get the suspected terrorists in their custody to spill
the beans about what's going on with Al-Qaeda and other
terrorist groups, it might be a dandy idea to torture them until
they blab. Torture? Just what can they be thinking?
considers torture as suspects stay silent: American
investigators are considering resorting to harsher
interrogation techniques, including torture, after facing a
wall of silence from jailed suspected members
of Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network,
according to a report yesterday [10/21/2001].
Antiterror Laws Pass Court Scrutiny?: The
hottest issue under debate has been the proposal authorizing
detention of suspected terrorists who are otherwise subject to
criminal or deportation proceedings. That is the equivalent of
denying release pending bail. Although unusual in a free society,
there are various circumstances under existing law when indefinite
detention is permitted. And the Supreme Court has so ruled. Individuals
who are dangers to the community may be held without bond as the
judicial or administrative process runs its course.
the Laws Fall Silent?: As America braces for a war of uncertain length
against an unspecified enemy, many have embraced the ancient legal
maxim inter arma, enim silent leges - "In time of war, the laws
fall silent." In a sense this is an understandable reaction to the depraved
lawlessness displayed by the foreign enemies who killed several
thousand Americans in the attacks of September 11th. While we certainly
must track down and eradicate those directly responsible for that attack, we must
also remember that our laws – the Constitution that frames our system of government,
and the heritage of Christian laws that inspired our nation's charter of
government – define us as a people. If we allow those laws to become "collateral
damage" in the "war on terrorism," we will suffer losses even greater than those
we endured on that terrible Tuesday morning.
Nervous Secret Service: Nervous reaction by the Secret Service immediately
following the attacks led to such bizarre security regulations as a
prohibition on window washers on the upper stories of private
office buildings three blocks from the White House. The attempted
closing of 17th Street and the successful closing of E Street were
accompanied by security experts demanding that Washington's Reagan
National Airport be shut down permanently because its flight patterns
were so close to the White House.
attacks, courtrooms become secret, documents sealed: As
part of what Attorney General John Ashcroft has called the biggest
criminal investigation in U.S. history, federal authorities have
detained more than 500 people without releasing the paperwork that
usually accompanies nearly any type of court proceeding.
out the NSA: Vox Day questions "…both the utility and motivation behind
the attempts to violate Americans' Fourth Amendment rights while at the same time
'building an anti-terror coalition' with noted anti-terrorists such as Arafat,
Putin and Assad."
Don't Inject Political Correctness
Into the War on Terrorism: In his legislative farewell, Gov. Ridge made one statement that is
troubling. He said: "To those Americans who would lash out at your fellow citizens simply because
they worship differently or dress differently or look differently than you do, there is a word for such
sword: Politically, our nation is trying to find a way to abolish the Constitution in deed, while
acknowledging it in word. The First Amendment guarantee that "Congress will not prohibit the free
exercise of religion" will be diluted by every congressional effort to protect America from radical Islamic
terrorism. Yet there is no clear alternative. The same two-edged sword that cuts down fundamental
Islam will cut down fundamental Christianity on its back swing.
Responding to terror with justice, not
revenge: If the past is any guide, the U.S. government may respond to this attack in two
counter-productive ways. American intervention overseas is likely to be stepped up, and the authorities
can be expected to impose authoritarian curbs on domestic liberties.
Anti-Attack Feds Push Carnivore:
An administrator at one major network service provider said that FBI agents showed up at his workplace on
Tuesday [9/11/2001] with a couple of Carnivores, requesting permission to place them in our core, along with
offers to actually pay for circuits and costs." The person declined to say for publication what the
provider's response was, "but a lot of people" at other firms were quietly going along with the FBI's
request. "I know that they are getting a lot of 'OKs' because they made it a point to mention that
they would only be covering our core for a few days, while their 'main boxes were being set up at the
Tier 1 carriers' -- scary," the engineer said.
I've been collecting information about
Carnivore for months.