The subject of privacy for "we the people" continues to be debated in the halls of Congress today as the House Bill being pushed would, on the one hand, allow unspecified intrusion into the content of the communications (phone, email, I pod, web sites, etc.) by our Government, with the full cooperation (going forward) of the companies that provide us with those services. On the other hand, the current Bill being pushed (until the Democrats cave in as usual), would not provide "amnesty" for those communication entities that very likely DID violate the privacy agreements (in place until recently) they had with THEIR customers.
My first question is WHY? A key point missing in this discussion is a critique of the practice of communication interception that has been provided by the current Administration. We have been told (in typical sound bite style) that only communications of American citizens"suspected" of possible "terrorist activities" AND in communication with "suspected" individuals OUTSIDE the United States. Does any "thinking" American citizen actually believe that all the furor over the program and the "critical" need for amnesty and the recent changes sent to customers by the communications companies is ONLY about that stated practice??
Let's examine the "rest of the story". Ask yourself just how the various "intelligence" Departments could (or would) have gone about monitoring "suspected" communications. The probability that they have a list of potential "terrorists", both within and outside our borders should be a given. But, with the tens of millions of phone, email, and other communications that take place on daily basis, how could these agencies possibility know or learn of the "new" threats? Did they simply intercept all communications initiated by anyone with a Middle Eastern surname or names that "sounded" like terrorists? Or, more likely, did these agencies initiate a much broader and much more invasive practice of attempting to monitor the communications of ALL American citizens and "flag" any contact that contained "key words" in a manner similar to doing a Google search? When GW and his Administration pressured the communication companies to cooperate and provide the US Government open access to our communications and "assured" them that doing so was "legal" (even though it wasn't), did GW also "assure" the phone and internet service providers that he would insulate them from any potential legal action their customers might begin when (or if) it was discovered that they had violated their own privacy agreements? Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, President Bush authorized and began the invasion of privacy on American citizens by stating he had the power to do so because he had the "war time power" to do so. Excuse me for asking but, with all due respect, just exactly who (specifically) were we "at war" with in the direct aftermath of 9/11? Terror is not a country! Terror is a term and a description of an intended state on mind. When GW proclaimed the "War on Terror" he tried to convince us that this was a declaration of war in the historical context that most citizens would relate to, such as the Civil War, or World War I and II. A "War on Terror" declared without a specified opponent borders on the absurd. I suppose one could define or understand that declaration as a "war" on anyone and everyone who has a grievance or disagrees or wishes to do harm to the America or its current "allies". That all sounds powerful in a climate of sorrow and anger and plays on the instinct for revenge but a bit of thought about that declaration shows that it is first not a war that can defined and second it is a "war" that will never end and cannot be "won" unless the United States is prepared and willing to systematically kill or otherwise eliminate EVERY person on planet earth that doesn't like or agree or is willing to yield to America's will. I have no doubt that there are actually those in powerful positions that would proceed with that "final solution". Are "we the people" willing to allow our Government (the Executive Branch specifically) to set aside our assumed privacy rights (details unexplained by our Government) at their choosing and to allow the Executive Branch to independently make the "judgment" as to the legality of ANY action they decide to take without opinion or oversight by the other two branches (Legislative and Judicial) of OUR Government? These must be among the most disturbing aspects of the conduct of the current administration!
Somehow, this "war on terror" proclamation convinced this administration that any policy they adopted regardless of what Federal laws or what "rights" of American citizens needed to be disregarded was justified and that any intrusion into our lives must be accepted because GW decided it was acceptable and after all even the destruction of our freedom and our laws was fair game to provide us freedom and a nation of laws. Think about that for a moment.
At any rate, I would submit that among the REAL reasons that GW is so desperate to provide the retroactive immunity to the communications companies is the fact that should the courts (the supposed third Branch of Government) be able to rule on the legality of the actions of our current administration and the communication companies there would be a likely outcome that would determine that GW has , in fact, violated and abused his authority as President. A Federal Court may also be able to determine the ugly details of just how vast the invasion of privacy of American citizens has been these past seven years and you know GW doesn't wish to fully explain himself. Of course any such review would not be revealed to "we the people" because the details would fall into the "National Security" arena (which is true) but if Congress (the Second branch of our Government) or the Judicial (our third branch of our Government) continues to be stonewalled by the Executive Branch, what type of Government do we really have at that point? The current (as it stands today) does call for a commission to investigate the program utilized by the current administration but GW is also opposed to this or any inquiry into the activities engaged in under his watch. What a surprise!
It the end, protection and providing for "we the people" is (or should be) of utmost importance to all of us and is a fundamental duty of all three branches of our Federal Government. Implicate in those duties is the responsibility of ALL the branches to uphold the Constitution and all the laws and "rights" that are the essence of the United states of America. The question remains however of how many of our "sacred" principles are going to damaged or destroyed to accomplish the goal of "winning" (still an undefined term)? The stated goal of many around the world who wish to do damage to America and her way of life is to bring about financial and social ruin to America. Must our own Government assist in our enemies success?
If you are a thinking person you must realize that protecting ourselves and our freedom and the current policy undertaken by the current administration do not have to be one and the same. There are alternative tactics and other ways to keep America strong and safe other than just continuing to march in lock step with policies that are rapidly destroying our rights to privacy (and other "rights") but depleting our National Treasury at alarming rates and creating yet another generation of families crushed by needless death or injury. A reevaluation or change in direction DOES NOT equate to "surrender" as some would have you believe!
We are living beneath our privilege if we continue to walk like sheep to the cliff and then simply fall off without at least asking "WHY".
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment