you pay attention to news about the "War on Terrorism," you may
be a bit confused about what our government is doing.
day Mr. Macho tells us we're at war and we must put up with the
intrusions of liberty that normally accompany war.
next day we're told this "struggle" may last beyond our lifetimes
(or at least until after November 2, 2004). But wars usually come
to an end. So this must not be a war.
we're told that people captured (no matter by whom) will be held
in military prisons and tried by military courts. So this must
be a war.
then we realize it can't be a war, because the Constitution provides
that only Congress can declare war – and it hasn't done so. Thus this
must not be a war.
is it war or is it Memorex?
neither. It's simply whatever the President chooses to call it
on any given day. They're making up the rules as they go along.
The only consistency is the constant invocation of the power of
the President to do whatever he wants.
as the shredding of the Constitution has put us at the mercy of
Congressmen who spend your money for whatever they choose, so
the "War on Terrorism" has put us at the mercy of the Bush administration
– which does whatever it wants in
the name of "national security."
the politicians choose to call it on any given day, they keep
acting as though the country is at war with some foreign power.
But since that foreign power isn't located in any specific part
of the world, our government feels free to attack anyone it wants,
anywhere it wants, anytime it wants –
and call it a "preemptive" strike against terrorists and terrorist
government never provides any evidence to support its claims that
some country is a proper target of attack.
that virtually everything you know about the "War on Terrorism"
and virtually everything you hear in the news emanates – without proof – from the same politicians who lie
to us regularly about budget surpluses and program reductions.
effect, we're supposed to believe everything they tell us –
even though in any other situation we consider them generally
to be deceiving, self-aggrandizing, power-hungry hypocrites.
told that the usual constitutional rules don't apply because the
country is at war. We must put up with invasions of civil
and we must allow the politicians to vote for boondoggles and
trust that some part of what they appropriate will actually make
the country safer.
while some Constitutional provisions do mention exceptions, there
are no exceptions specified for wartime.
fact, one reason we have a Constitution is to protect
us from politicians at times of greatest danger.
it's important that they obey the Constitution when appropriating
money, how much more important it is that they obey the Constitution
when our lives are at stake!
the past 140 years, the politicians have been tearing down the
bit by bit.
early 2001, the only part of the Constitution that still provided
any protection for us was the Bill of Rights. Even with outrages
such as asset forfeiture and no-knock warrants, most accused Americans
still enjoyed the ability to confront witnesses against them,
a right to a speedy trial by jury, and protection from cruel and
no more. Apparently, the Bill of Rights is a luxury Americans
can no longer afford.
least that's the way George Bush, Dick Cheney, and John Ashcroft
locked up Jose Padilla and thrown away the key. No attorney, no
charges against him, no trial, no plans for a trial.
who cares? After all, he's a terrorist, isn't he?
he? How do we know that?
the politicians told us so.
reason we have a Bill of Rights is to guarantee an open trial
at which the evidence is available for all to see – rather than depending on the assurances
of politicians who have already proven to be untrustworthy.
happens if one of those super-efficient FBI or CIA agents decides
you are a terrorist? You might go to a military prison.
No right to see an attorney –
or even your family. No trial. And probably no guarantee you won't
are you going to prove it if you can't speak to anyone but the
people who arrested you?
this the kind of America
you want to live in?