My Photo

Core topic

« All quiet on the Western front | Main | Total Information Awareness »




So, what exactly is supposed to be threatening the survival of America's liberty - that we'll be conquered by Islamic terrorists who'll make us wear burkas and pray to Mecca five times per day? Or that the terrorist attacks against the US will become so severe that Administration will have to destroy our liberty in order to "save" it?


I'm still amazed--and maybe I'm just naive--that as many American citizens and journalists are willing to accept the thesis, without question, that because terrorists attacked us, we have to accept severe restrictions on our civil liberties until some hazily-defined point at which we "win." When the newly-elected president makes a similar statement in his inaugural address, and it passes practically without comment, I get even more alarmed than I was (if that's possible).


And yet, as Richard Clarke (and I believe you) points out, the Clinton Administration managed to catch all but one of the terrorists responsible for the WTC bombing, run them all through the criminal justice system, and put them away for a very long time, without the USA PATRIOT act, without a Department of Homeland Security, and without invading a single other country. But has the Bush Administration explained why they've needed to suspend habeas corpus; the Geneva Conventions; and Article I, Section 8, Clauses 10, 11, 12, and 14 of the U.S. Constitution?

The comments to this entry are closed.