• 2001 Sep 11
• Thread A
• 2001 Sep 15
• Thread A
• Thread B
• Thread C
• 2001 Sep 16
  • Thread A
• 2001 Sep 27
  • Thread A

Blockquoth the poster:

but it's completely lopsided in the other direction, because while we can filter and reencode the CD industry's "secure" data files to our hearts' content, the government doesn't have write access to a hundred million webpages.

... yet.

Blockquoth the poster:

Your freedom means NOTHING if you are not alive to exercise it and/or your country no longer exists.

Your life means nothing if your freedoms no longer exist.

How can people not see that legislation like this is one of the goals of the terrorists? It will hardly impact them at all, because they have more reliable, cheaper methods available. But to reduce risk a little -- no, belay that. To appear to reduce risk a little, Congress as usual is willing to erode the basic freedoms and guaranties that the American Revolution was about, that have permitted the largest open society, that have led to all the other ancilliary benefits of being American.

I simply do not understand a need to bypass the courts. It is essentially handing the judicial power of the government over to the executive branch, and any major reshuffling of power is a dangerous thing.

The people who committed this outrage are looking to make us react. They cannot stand the existence of an open society governed by the rule of law, because it contradicts their own desparate need to believe only in the rule of force. Lacking legitimacy, they must seek to deny it to all others. And we, like idiots, will be happy to do it.

I mourn, with all Americans, for the victims and their families. I feel the rage and impotence of being a citizen of the most powerful country in history and still being unable to protect our own. I want to bring the clenched right fist of God down on those responsible and to utterly exterminate them and the sociopolitical virus that spawned them.

But I don't want to do so at the price of everything that makes this a country worth living in and dying for.

Blockquoth the poster:

Franklin was talking about liberties far more essential than what is being debated here.

Franklin and his contemporaries would likely have argued that there are few, if any, liberties more important than the open operation of courts under the rule of law... and that one of those few would be freedom of speech.

Um, both of which are curtailed by this bill.

I'm certain Franklin would consider his quote a propos.

Blockquoth the poster:

the only thing the feds are after are the guys who killed 5000+ of our citizens.

... for now.

It's not that the desire is so out of place, as worry as to how far this will go. What seems urgent now becomes convenient becomes standard becomes routine becomes indispensable. And then we see the FBI saying, "Well, drugs kill thousands of Americans each year. So do drunk drivers. And anyone manipulating the market disrupts the economy and impacts millions. And those who associate with anyone who is eventually linked to any of these must be suspect themselves..."

Don't let the terrorists win! Don't sanction the uprooting of fundamental liberties for the impression of action and the illusion of safety. What is most desired by these despicable people is exactly that we become them, that we give up on three centuries of open and free government.

Blockquoting the blockquoter:

Don't let the terrorists win! Don't sanction the uprooting of fundamental liberties for the impression of action and the illusion of safety. What is most desired by these despicable people is exactly that we become them, that we give up on three centuries of open and free government.

Where in the Constitution does it say that law enforcement cannot request information from ISPs? Or do you have another source of "fundamental liberties" that I am unaware of? The bill of rights gave us protection from "unreasonable search and seizure" of our persons, papers and property but also provides the exception in the case of probable cause of law breaking.

That said, I don't think that the terrorist most want us to give up on our form of government, more likely they want us to stay the heck out of their part of the world.

Blockquoth the poster:

  The bill of rights gave us protection from "unreasonable search and seizure" of our persons, papers and property but also provides the exception in the case of probable cause of law breaking.

Fair enough. Truth be told, the cooperation of the ISPs is not what worries me, nor what I meant to rail against. They are, at least, conforming to accepted usages of law. I am much more worried by, say, the Senate bill that expanded the validity of warrantless searches and that allows the FBI or the Justice Dept to cloak anything and everything behind an unbreachable wall of "potential threat to national security". I firmly believed judicial oversight is necessary.

Right now, everyone's pulling together and inquiries are legitimate. How long, though, will it be before some FBI bureaucrat slips up? How long will he resist the temptation to bury everything under the National Security fence?

It's all about sacrifice. Over 5,000 people have lost their lives because the majority of people in the U.S. have been unwilling to make sacrifices. I am ready to start making sacrifices to ensure that you and I do not meet the same fate.

What are some of those sacrifices:

1) Long waits at the airport.
2) Higher ticket prices to support better security personnel and sky marshalls
3) Less privacy to ensure law enforcement can do what they need to do
4) My life. I am willing to die for my country, my way of life and to protect civilization

At times of uncertainty and possibly war, everyone will have to make sacrifices. What are you willing to sacrifice?

Blockquoth the poster:

I am ready to start making sacrifices to ensure that you and I do not meet the same fate.

Bravo. I hope when the call comes, you retain your civic-mindedness. But I am struck by #4 of your willing sacrifices:

  My life. I am willing to die for my country, my way of life and to protect civilization

Protect civilization? By sacrificing all that is good and true in it? By making a mockery of the sacrifice of thousands before you? By abandoning the principles that have made this nation the largest free, open, and lawful society in the history of humanity? I'm not sure exactly what you think you'll be "protecting" as you support calls for abridging traditional freedoms. Now is exactly the time to worry about civil liberties and the natural tendency to curtail them. Our freedoms are precisely what makes "us" different from "them", and it would be horrible if we allow these terrorists to succeed because we are too mad or too scared to remember our proud heritage of the rule of law.

What are you willing to sacrifice?

I am willing to sacrifice time and treasure. I am willing to risk the lives of those sworn to protect the United States, and I am willing to serve if called. I am willing to sacrifice convenience and comfort.

And I am willing to sacrifice the entirely-reasonable but utterly dangerous lust for vengeance that could drive us more toward what we fight than what we are. I am willing to sacrifice a little safety in preservation of our traditional freedoms and the rule of law.

Are you?

Now is exactly the time to worry about civil liberties and the natural tendency to curtail them.

You no[sic] nothing of sacrifice. Why don't you take a look at your grandparent's generation and what they sacrificed so that you we have freedom and liberty today. It's not just mamby-pamby speech restrictions (although they had those), we're talking travel restrictions, food restrictions. Freakin' automobile factories became airplane factories!

Let me make a suggestion, and I mean this seriously to anyone who hasn't really looked into it: pick a few books about World War II. You might think you understand the prices that have been paid by our past generations, but I guarantee you don't or you wouldn't have posted this message.

Civil liberties don't mean a damn if we have people bent on destroying us. I quoted this in another post, but I think it bears repeating. Colin Powell said something interesting this morning: (paraphrase): "The terrorists do not care how many people they kill. The scale of their attacks is limited only by their technology." Is it going to take a nuke in New York before you think there are something things that just might be more important at this time?

Blockquoth the poster:

Let me make a suggestion, and I mean this seriously to anyone who hasn't really looked into it: pick a few books about World War II.

Hmmm. I sort of think the 20+ books I've read over the course of the past few years -- about WWII, the political aspects leading up to it and following it, the restrictions during and following it, and the legal issues raised -- might qualify me just a little to speak on this, at least as an informed lay person.

Don't pull your sanctimonious crap on me. Just because I don't agree with your position doesn't mean I am ignorant, any more than your disagreeing with me makes you so. Indeed, I have read avidly and thoroughly and have pondered much about both WW II and the impact terrorism has on democracies. I'd been thinking about it long before Sep 11. And I guess I would say that anyone who posted your message demonstrates little true understanding of the fragility and value of the American experiment.

Civil liberties mean "a damn" especially at a time like this, when legitimate fears lead people to call for their erosion. Unlike every knee-jerk reactionary, I have faith in America that we can -- and will -- work out a way to protect our nation and our fundamental liberties. I have faith that a nation can protect its citizens within the rule of law. I have faith that the American spirit can triumph over the darkness that illuminates the hearts of the terrorists and over the fear that clouds the hearts of citizens.

We are stronger than that. We are smarter than that. We are better than that.

Blockquoth the poster:

For goodness sake, why bother to make it harder for the FBI than it is for a sys. admin?

Um, because:

• The sys admin can't arrest me.
• The sys admin isn't an agent of the Federal government.
• The sys admin is essentially immune to subversion for political ends, or at least, vastly more so than the FBI.
• The sys admin could be sued for damages.
• Just for emphasis: The sys admin can't arrest me.

The agents of the government are still citizens but they are not merely citizens. It matters a lot when we expand the police power and constrict judicial oversight. In fact, it means the beginning of the end.