|
|
| For Now, Security Trumps Liberties |
|
Posted by FoM on September 18, 2001 at 20:52:44 PT By Brad Knickerbocker, Staff Writer of The CSM Source: Christian Science Monitor 
At times like this, a democracy must balance its need to protect itself with the freedoms that define it. Last week's terrorist attacks have raised the debate pitting homeland defense against civil liberties to a level not seen since World War II. In the days since the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, the US Senate has passed a bill allowing enhanced police wiretap powers and more widespread use of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's "Carnivore" Internet-surveillance system. The number of businesses conducting criminal background checks on employees has shot up. Congress is pushing more now to ban encryption products, legitimately used to protect business secrets, but also available as a tool by terrorists and other lawbreakers. Calls for racial and ethnic profiling in the name of domestic security are also increasing, as well as legislative proposals that would make it easier for government agencies to keep secrets. And there is likely to be expanded use of "face-recognition software" to scan everyday crowds for suspected criminals. Attorney General John Ashcroft says he wants to make it easier to detain foreigners, to wiretap phones, and to track money laundering. Warren Goldstein, an American-history professor at the University of Hartford in Connecticut, predicts that government agencies will begin scanning subscription lists for magazines, newspapers, and journals, as well as watching online book purchases. "I think we're going to return with far greater electronic powers of surveillance to the kinds of things which were commonplace in the 1950s," he says. Private businesses and organizations are also likely to increase their scrutiny of civilians. Robert Mather, president of Pre-employ.com, Inc. in Redding, Calif., reports a doubling of calls from employers who want to conduct criminal background checks on employees. "In the past, it was mainly new hires that were checked," says Mr. Mather. "Many executives are now looking closely at their current policy and procedures and including current employees." There's a historical pattern here. During the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln suspended writs of habeas corpus, part of the due process for criminal defendants. After World War I, suspected anarchists were arrested without warrant, and immigrants were deported. During World War II, 77,000 American citizens of Japanese ancestry were imprisoned for the duration of the war solely because of their race. During the cold war, it was illegal to teach communism. And after the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, new legislation allowed the use of secret evidence to deport people. In retrospect, some of those acts were seen to have been wrong -legally questionable, if not unconstitutional - and based on unfounded fears. Today, the President and congressional leaders say the United States is at "war." But how willingly will Americans accept what could be the greatest impositions on their freedoms and the greatest level of government intrusiveness most of them have ever seen? With images of mass destruction and loss life seared into their consciousness, most seem willing to shift in the direction of heightened security. An ABC-Washington Post poll last week showed that 66 percent of Americans would give up some civil liberties to fight terrorism. The latest New York Times/CBS News Poll puts the figure at 74 percent. "It's generally true, over the ages, that if you ask people to choose between freedom and security, they will choose security," says Clark McCauley, a psychology professor at Bryn Mawr College in Pennsylvania. Still, there is a difference between mere inconveniences and more-intrusive measures. While 86 percent in the New York Times/CBS Poll said they wouldn't mind guards and metal detectors at public buildings and events, and 69 percent said they'd be willing to arrive three hours early for a domestic-airline flight, only 39 percent said they would willingly allow government monitoring of their telephone calls and e-mail messages. That's still a figure that troubles some. "That means that there are 39 percent of the American people who would allow a level of governmental intrusion that you only have in American prisons or in the military during wartime," says Dr. Goldstein. Meanwhile, lawmakers across the political spectrum -from conservative Senate minority leader Trent Lott (R) of Miss. to liberal Rep. Barney Frank (D) of Mass. -approve of increased security measures that could impinge on personal liberties. Last year, following a recent pattern of attacks on Americans abroad, the National Commission on Terrorism recommended that "the Attorney General should ensure that the FBI is exercising fully its authority for investigating suspected terrorist groups or individuals, including authority for electronic surveillance." Still, there is growing concern that something fundamental to the US could be lost here. Some look at the "war on drugs" and wonder whether "collateral damage" there -racial profiling, police breaking into the wrong house, people mistakenly killed -is being sufficiently considered. "Maybe the Senate wants to just go ahead and adopt new abilities to wiretap our citizens," says Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. "Maybe they want to adopt new abilities to go into people's computers. Maybe that will make us feel safer. Maybe. And maybe what the terrorists have done made us a little bit less safe." Note: Amid heightened security, some worry about erosion of freedom. Source: Christian Science Monitor (US) Related Articles & Web Site: Holy Warriors Escalate an Old War Freedom’s Value - National Review New Powers Sought for Surveillance FBI Using Net-Snooping Systems FBI's Carnivore Gets a Thumbs Up Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Comment #23 posted by FoM on September 19, 2001 at 11:29:15 PT |
| After I read your comment I went and looked and we have 897,957 Total Hits so far this month. That's a lot and I am pleased to say the least. I feel better because I said that I was afraid and you all are giving me strength to go on. Maybe I just needed to mention that I feel vulnerable. I try not to do that but this is all different and I know lots of us are afraid. [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #22 posted by ekim on September 19, 2001 at 11:20:51 PT:
|
| Please people lets get together and see the glass half full. No matter what happens here in MI. The Soros people are allready planning other petitions. We have the Gov. of NM. standing with us. We have some of the brightest minds in the country looking into the use of plants for fuel, plastics, paper, fiber. in Illinois. They have given there Gov. Ryan three hemp bills. He is history but all the great thinkers are not. The hemp bills will be returning. The good Doctor here has seen many changes, we must keep going. FOM havent your numbers for the site been strong in all this. What was the old saying tho I fear the shadow of death I will go on. Hey why not if we beleive something to be true what has changed. Please tell us if you plan a party to watch C-SPAN. http://drugsense.org/radio/features.htm The debate "Directing America's Drug War: Which Way To A Safer Society?" was staged and recorded for National Public Radio's "Justice Talking" program. The entire debate is currently scheduled to air on Sunday, 7 October 2001 over public radio stations nationwide. It also will be broadcast on C-SPAN. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #21 posted by FoM on September 19, 2001 at 11:19:20 PT |
| Thank you New Mexican and everyone. There is only one good thing about this tragedy. Unity. We might need each other in the future and that's why this site needs to keep going but it is going to be very hard. I'm still waiting to wake up and find out this was all a bad dream. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #20 posted by New Mexican on September 19, 2001 at 11:10:42 PT |
| This site is the only thing that keeps all of us from going crazy FOM and I hope you're okay with that. You are doing a greater service than you know, and I truly feel that these events of the past week will backfire in our favor sooner than later. Keep the faith, I've been doing my research and things will change. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #19 posted by dddd on September 19, 2001 at 11:06:05 PT |
| I would have never noticed the 'Comedy/comic' dog thing if you hadnt busted yourself on it.....but,,I really liked what you said about your sense of humor keeping you going..I consider laughter to be an extremely potent medicine,and I hope you will be able to laugh again soon...it's alot more fun than crying,,,and it will be a while before they figure out a way to make laughing illegal....If laughter was a drug,,it would be really expensive,,and if you got busted for it,,the mandatory minimum would double,,if you laughed in front of a judge,,or within 500 feet of a school.................dddd [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #18 posted by MDG on September 19, 2001 at 10:44:25 PT |
| Oh well. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #17 posted by Hope4usAll on September 19, 2001 at 10:43:35 PT |
| No one can really see where the drug reform will go from here, but I believe that when our country is in a time of war they might see a realilistic vew of priorities. The Drug war may not end, however the war on weed may indeed come to a blunt stop. During WW2 Americans were called on to grow hemp for the troops. As we see a real war, that directly ends the lives of innocent Americans, maybe people in general will find the understanding that we need. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #16 posted by MDG on September 19, 2001 at 10:41:10 PT |
| I only watched a couple of minutes of Jay Leno last night, mostly as I waited for Conan. I just turned it on MUTE when he was doing the John McCain interview. Then, I just went to sleep a few minutes into it. What's the point? I just want to hear Triumph, the Insult Comedy Dog, say, "Next to the War on Drugs, the War on Terrorism is the biggest scam pulled on the American people...for me to poop on!" Damn, it seems like no one laughs anymore. My sense of humor is the only thing I've got going for me...and I don't even make myself laugh these days. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #15 posted by dddd on September 19, 2001 at 10:36:48 PT |
| You are the BEST!!!
Love...dddd [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #14 posted by Patrick on September 19, 2001 at 10:34:44 PT |
| I love you for what you are doing here. You run a website that I have found to be both therapeutic and informative. Cannabis use is all about PEACE. We need that message now more than ever. Granted there may not be a lot of news about cannabis prohibition right now. To me that is a good thing! I think our common cause is as strong as ever now. It will be awhile before law enforcement returns, if ever, to the drug war on marijuana. The criminal justice focus has definitely shifted in this country. This event has changed our national psyche. I will still laugh, cry, and share my viewpoint with you as long as possible. Cannabis has a history over 5000 years old and not one shred of evidence that using it causes violence. Violence is the result of its prohibition. So until the day comes that we can freely grow marijuana in our gardens, you have a purpose here greater than yourself and those of us that post our views here. God Bless America and You! Hang in there. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #13 posted by FoM on September 19, 2001 at 10:24:10 PT |
| I am not a quiter. I am a fighter. I was alone and decided to watch Jay Leno and Conan O'Brien last night and watching them try to deal with this shows how desperate the world is becoming. Nothing is funny anymore. Everything is very serious. I know we will have young men killed in this war. We have a right to be as upset as we are as a Nation and individuals. I want Cannabis News to continue and as long as we are allowed I will. I just won't find much news but all of you are what makes Cannabis News tick. I love all of you and will not let you down or then I would feel like a failure and I couldn't handle that following me around for the rest of my life. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #12 posted by Poisoned1523Days on September 19, 2001 at 10:13:39 PT |
| I don't think we should get discouraged. One of the fundamental ideas of the harm reduction approach is that legalization denies funding to violent criminal groups. If we stay on topic with this message it will fit right in to the current situation. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #11 posted by dddd on September 19, 2001 at 10:12:10 PT |
| Please,dont be thinking you dont have a purpose anymore!The reason you started this may seem to be getting lost,or drowned out by the recent happenings,but what is going on here is extremely special and important,,and I dont think I'm the only one who feels this way. I realize that things have become out of focus,and confused recently, I can understand how it is alot of work,to keep this going,,but dont be ,,regardless of any amount of worry,fear,insecurity,shock,displeasure,, [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #10 posted by FoM on September 19, 2001 at 09:08:57 PT |
| Let me see if I can say how I feel. We shouldn't throw rocks at Christian Fundamentalist because they believe they are doing the right thing. Everyone that believes with their whole heart in their Faith or convictions shouldn't be hated but we should feel sorry for them that they can't see. We all have our strong convictions. I know the world will never be the same and we should really weigh what we say so that we don't become part of the problem instead of helping to be a solution. I don't know where Cannabis News is going anymore. It might not have a purpose much longer and that makes me very sad. I'm talking to my husband right now about all my mixed feelings I am having. Many things will change in our lives as we get ready for war. I don't believe we will see much change in current drugs laws now and we were so close. I hope my feelings about our future are wrong but I wanted to say how I feel at this moment. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #9 posted by dddd on September 19, 2001 at 08:05:44 PT |
| ...I see nothing wrong with "picking on" Falwell or Robertson,, In fact,,,I would encourage picking on these pompous freaks!... ..This pair of loudmouths may have started out with good intentions,,but they have dimented into American Ayatollahs, ,,they have become like the Tammy Fay Baker Swaggart Jones of commercialized god product pushers.They have lost sight of what they began as,,,the idea that they could be "picked on",is like suggesting that dubya is honest and smart....dddd [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #8 posted by Silent_Observer on September 19, 2001 at 08:00:42 PT |
| To see these two as being any less than a threat is being blind. The only difference is, they wear suits, have Southern accents and use Biblical language. I do believe this proves a point I had been making earlier - people are less likely to see you as a threat if you look like one of them. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #7 posted by dddd on September 19, 2001 at 07:30:20 PT |
| ..You dont see how they could be a threat?,,,,well,consider the Ayatollah Homeini.(obvious mis-spelling),,how would he be a threat to anyone?,,Who is a threat,,and who can say how we judge who is a threat? In the case of Falwell,or Robertson,I dont think we could say that they are a "threat",but they do lead a massive amount of people with their ideology,and if we are to blame people such as bin Laden for the actions of zealots that he has brainwashed,and influenced by means of religious fundamentalism,,,then how are we to distinguish, or draw the line at blaming people who we think caused people to commit murder?...would this mean that certain people in the ondcp, and hardcore drug war proponents should be held responsible for innocent people who were murdered by SWAT team,wrong house,no knock raids?....If we follow the logic of this new war on terror insanity,we could trace responsibility for for anything to anyone. This new War on Terror,is absurd and crazy!It has no basis in reality,logic, ..You cannot die,,,unless you have lived... Carlos Castenada wrote about something the Shaman told him,in his book,
(*)possible innacuracies in exactness of quote and book title. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #6 posted by Poisoned1523Days on September 19, 2001 at 06:21:30 PT |
| I don't think we should pick on Falwell and Robertson. Neither are terrorists or engage in violent behavior. They merely have a set of beleifs that they strongly believe in. I do not think conservativ Christians are a threat to anybody. I will admit though that I am not an expert on these men. Please let me know if I have missed something. I just do not see how they are a threat to us. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #5 posted by MikeEEEEE on September 19, 2001 at 05:53:07 PT |
| This is, indeed, terrorism's prime strategy, as the philosopher/father of terrorism, Georges Sorel, pointed out in 1908 in his hugely influential Reflections on Violence. If terror is an instrument of the weak, escalation is the mistake of power. Any good leader knows fear modivates an angry public, enough fear could easily be used to take their personal freedoms away. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #4 posted by MikeEEEEE on September 19, 2001 at 05:46:49 PT |
| As the sheep sleep in fear the powers find the opportunity to take more freedoms away. The enemy isn't here, or maybe it is? [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #3 posted by theropinfool on September 19, 2001 at 05:19:45 PT |
| And if you want me assassinated for misspelling assassinated, fine. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #2 posted by theropinfool on September 19, 2001 at 05:14:03 PT |
| In 1976 Gerald Ford issued an executive order that heads of state could not be assasinated. Am I correct? I hope that George Bush will sign an executive order declaring common, ordinary US citizens like Tom Crosslin cannot be assasinated. Love thy neighbor as thine own self, unless of course he is your fellow countryman. Who would you rather have as a neighbor, Tom Crosslin or Osama bin Laden? You have no choice in the matter, sorry. I'll take freedom, for I have no security. It is both insane and sad. Heaping amounts of both, there is. God Almughty [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #1 posted by dddd on September 19, 2001 at 04:10:17 PT |
| ...perhaps the following simplistic idea will help.......... Let's step back for a minute,and look at this in the big picture. Here in the US,,people who actually kill people,are subject to *)The people who actually did this,,are DEAD!...they are the ones *)Even if they would have somehow survived,,could there not *)If we somehow blame the people who indoctrinated the suicide If this War on Terror,and anyone who harbored a terrorist makes sense,,
[ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |