HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Apr 22, 2004 I would like to open my second column with an open call for all of my readers to feel free to write in with any and all comments and criticisms, so long as they are maturely voiced. I failed to mention this earlier; ironic in a column defending the freedom of speech and press. We will continue to look at jeopardized American liberties by looking at the Justice Department’s baby: the USA PATRIOT Act. This act, pushed through Congress in the wake of the September 11 attacks (indeed 9-11 seems to be one of the best reasons to jab and prune the Bill of Rights), PATRIOT was read by fewer than 5% of Senators before being voted on. Now, I am a follower of the Lyndon Johnson doctrine of “don’t mess around with things if you don’t know what you’re doing,” but steamrolling an amendment-free, reading-free vote using the blanket censor of “National Security” to avoid debate while fluffing the case by naming it PATRIOT seems just a bit shady on Attorney General John Ashcroft’s part. “Who would vote against a bill called Patriot? It looks horrible on a 30 second campaign ad spot.” An Alaskan Senator said, responding to a radio caller asking if he had voted for the bill that gave the government sweeping new authority. PATRIOT has powerfully good points, such as allowing database sharing between FBI and CIA offices in processing federal felony cases. However, its shocking negative essentially neuters its positive. The ability of the government to enter your home without warrant, seize property (so that’s where my socks go) and be free from informing you of their action steps beyond the limits of just law enforcement and good government. Many have calmed the masses by cooing the Orwellian phrase “If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide,” but have we really moved so far right of Democracy to abandon innocent until proven guilty? Have we abandoned reasonable doubt and the basic legal groundwork of our nation in order to stab blindly at the ghostly shadow of terror in our midst? It was Thomas Jefferson who warned us against giving our complete trust to our nation’s political leaders, no matter how convincing they may seem. Chief Justice William Rehnquist said three centuries later, “In times of war, justice is not silent, but it speaks with a muted voice.” The burden falls, as it should, on the reactionary will of the people of the United States to produce change. It is the duty of the people to abide by the laws of the United States, but when those laws allow the government to indefinitely detain you, it becomes the duty of the people to stand and produce progressive change. We must not forget that government is the tool of the people, not the other way around. People ask what business the government has wasting resources by detaining those who are not terrorists. They claim that such ideas as a nighttime knock at the door are paranoid delusions. However, as defined in PATRIOT, terrorism is “attempting to influence the policy of the government.” By that law, I am a terrorist for writing this, and so are you by reading it and not turning me in to Homeland Security. Besides, as the media is barred from covering PATRIOT-related detainments and the government is not legally bound to notify the families of any detained, there’s know way to know what happens or who goes. They simply become a memory. The very idea that John Ashcroft, a radical among radicals, could make you vanish should get the bells of town hall ringing and mobilize the Paul Reveres of our day. The act has caused near- revolt among librarians forced to turn over reading lists that may contain “terrorist” material. What next, they ask; will there be a council to make sure we’re reading what they deem safe? In the United States, we enjoy a level of freedom unparalleled throughout the rest of the world. This is why it is such a crime to so flagrantly slash at the Bill of Rights. Osama bin Laden’s plans killed thousands and forever changed the way the world looks at law and justice. However bin Laden would only succeed more if, in fear of more attacks, we began to shed the freedoms earned in revolt a nd toned by war. By giving the government carte blanche to strip rights hands the victory to bin Laden and all anti-American groups. Benjamin Franklin summed it up well: “Those who sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither freedom nor security.” ------------ About the author: Max Burns lives in Indianapolis and interns with the Indiana Democratic Party. He is the webmaster of The Foaming Liberal and author of the fantasy-fiction novel Alcardia. He is currently a junior at Lawrence North High School and is active in political clubs and associations. Email: MBurns_NS@hotmail.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
