The kind of intrusion by government allowed by the American people today is utterly astounding.Bank records, medical records, political viewpoints, phone conversations, emails, child rearing practices, food eating habits, health pursuits, social networking habits, biometric data, travel; nothing is safe from the prying eyes of government anymore.
I say “we decided”, because we must bear a large part of the blame.
The argument put forth by establishment proponents has always been that the government’s task is to keep us safe.In order to do this, they say, there can be nowhere for “evil doers” to hide.Therefore, the privacy of every individual must be sacrificed for the greater good of the greater number.This argument is unabashed nonsense.
Without a doubt, all the anti-4th Amendment legislation that has been passed over the course of last decade is focused not on some sinister force, foreign or domestic. Instead, it has been focused on average American citizens, because, whether we want to admit it or not, the government sees US as their greatest enemy.
1) Assassinations Against Al Qaeda Agents, Even If They Are American Citizens, Is Justifiable
The nature of the target is irrelevant to the principle underlying the situation. I don’t care if Anwar al-Awlaki was an agent of Hades, the conscience of a country must take precedence over the short term threats that country faces. If a society is unable to maintain its conscience and its principles in the face of hardship, then perhaps that society is not worthy of survival. There are, indeed, many more important things than national security.
This is how all tyranny begins; with a small group or element of a culture singled out for the loss of human rights, while the rest of the people look on and cheer.Eventually, the exception to the rule becomes the rule, and everyone suffers. Under no circumstances should our government be allowed to rewrite Constitutional protections or our moral compass, even if it means giving so called “terrorists” fair treatment under the law.Never forget, the term “terrorist” is as arbitrary as any nowadays, and could be used against you as easily as it could be used against anyone else.
Again, “homegrown terrorism” is a highly arbitrary label. If one looks at statements and white papers coming from the Department Of Homeland Security, or the Department Of Justice, anyone from Constitutionalists, to Ron Paul supporters, to militia members, to barter networkers and sound money proponents, or anyone who even expresses an interest in any of these subjects, is considered a potential domestic terrorist threat.Where is this headed? Think about it. If these types of people are already being categorized as extremists, what’s to stop the government form categorizing them as enemy combatants?
Okay. Let’s say for the sake of argument that rendition and torture actually could save some lives, though I have never heard of any of these Jack Bauer moments taking place in the real world. Let’s say my life and those I love could be spared.Frankly, I would rather die than be a party to behavior as reprehensible as kidnapping and torture. I couldn’t care less about the theoretical benefits of the activity. As stated earlier, a nation hanging by the poisonous framework of moral relativism is doomed to failure and decay.Despite the propaganda often spread by elitist elements without our government, our military, and our local law enforcement, you DO NOT need to become the monster in order to defeat the monster.This lie should not be allowed to stand…
Senator Lindsay Graham, a backer of the National Defense Authorization Act, specifically outlined the bill’s jurisdiction over American citizens and even admitted it makes the U.S. itself a “combat zone” under the international laws of war (while at the same time presenting the lie that Federal due process would somehow be enforced for those who are captured).We who oppose the bill could do a lot more without being rightfully accused of “overreaction”.If Americans are not to be targeted, then why create the bill in the first place?Traditional laws of war would be more than sufficient to handle foreign threats, and domestic response agencies like the FBI could easily continue doing whatever it is they supposedly do to safeguard our country.The ONLY reason to introduce a bill which frees the U.S. Government and the DHS to act militarily within the borders of our own nation would be to target U.S. citizens, and to undermine normal Constitutional processes.The legislation is self-incriminating. Only a complete dullard would argue otherwise.
The only practical explanation I can think of for someone to actually believe this argument is overmedication. Despite what we’re all taught in middle school, our government as it exists today and has for many decades does not represent the will of the people.Two dominant political parties with cosmetic differences in rhetoric but nearly identical legislative platforms and voting records is not an expression of a legitimately free republic.The system revolves around corporate ideologies of globalization, not elections. Its beneficiaries are a limited and powerful fringe of society, not the masses.