cannabisnews.com: Who Gave Your Rights Away? Who Gave Your Rights Away? Posted by FoM on November 27, 2001 at 09:49:27 PT By Harry Browne Source: WorldNetDaily Many conservatives, liberals and libertarians are protesting the numerous invasions of your liberty that Congress and the Bush administration have imposed during the past two months. But without realizing it, many of the protestors brought these invasions on themselves. This is America? I do share their concerns, however. First, Congress rammed through an "anti-terrorism" bill that violates the civil liberties of all Americans, not just terrorists. The new law allows federal officials to search your home when you're not present and not even tell you your home has been searched. You could come home one day and find your computer, file cabinets and legal papers have disappeared. You'd naturally think it was a burglary, but the burglars would be government employees (shades of Watergate). Warrants can be issued in secret, and you may not be allowed to see a warrant – or contest it – covering a search of your property. This is America? Government officials can go into any company anywhere and search records of your purchases and credit history, discover the websites you've visited, or monitor your e-mail – without evidence of a crime and without telling you, and they can order the companies not to tell you about the search. Then the Bush administration, apparently invoking the divine right of kings, decided that people can be tried and executed by secret courts (using secret evidence not available for you to refute), that government agents can eavesdrop on attorney-client conversations, and that federal agents can conduct searches without judicial oversight. This is America? And understand that the so-called "War on Terrorism" is only two months old. This is just the beginning. What's still to come? In previous wars, citizens were imprisoned for speaking out against the government, newspapers were closed for protesting the war, private publications were censored, and people of foreign ancestry were put in concentration camps. We have a lot to look forward to. Don't be deceived! The press implies that the new civil-liberties invasions will apply only to terrorists. Not true. They apply to you, because anyone can be suspected of being a terrorist – including you. In fact, the new definition of "suspected terrorist" includes people speaking out against government policies. And if law-enforcement officials are to decide whose civil liberties will be denied, one of them may become convinced you're connected to the terrorists in some way, try you in a secret court, sentence you, imprison you and even execute you – with no opportunity for you to appeal the verdict or your sentence. This is America? An administration official told The Washington Post "The U.S. Constitution doesn't protect anyone hiding and planning acts of violence." But what he meant was, "The U.S. Constitution doesn't protect anyone we suspect of hiding and planning acts of violence." They don't know who's actually guilty until after a civil, public trial – conducted with all the traditional rules of evidence. What they have arrogated to themselves is the power to decide whether or not you will be protected by the Constitution. This is America? If you're not frightened by this, you're simply not paying attention. Won't be limited to a few people Have you been told that some of these invasions apply only to aliens – or some other small group of people? Don't be reassured. When has any invasion of liberty not been expanded to cover all people eventually? The clearly unconstitutional RICO laws were supposed to apply only to organized crime – but hardly a single Mafia kingpin has been prosecuted using RICO, while abortion protestors and stockbrokers have been jailed by these laws. The clearly unconstitutional asset-forfeiture laws were only to nab big-time drug dealers, but all across America the property of innocent people has been seized. It's only a matter of time until every new oppression applies to all Americans. Why this happened I said that many of those protesting these invasions brought this on themselves. How? It's very simple. Attorney General John Ashcroft justified the unconstitutional police-state tactics by saying, "I think it's important to understand that we are at war now." And there you have it. As Randolph Bourne said, "War is the health of the state." Once you grant the government war-making powers, you grant the politicians the power to do anything they want. After all, you can't put your own personal liberty ahead of the good of the Fatherland, can you? Congress didn't declare war. There were none of the usual pre-war negotiations to try to avoid going to war. We're not even at war with any specific nation. But just utter the magic word "war" and all your rights can be stolen from you. So if you hollered for war, you hollered to have your rights taken away from you. Who gave your rights away? You did – if you supported the idea that the politicians should be free to do anything they want to satisfy a national lust for revenge. Isn't it time to start taking back your liberty?Harry Browne, Libertarian presidential candidate in the 2000 election, is the director of public policy at the American Liberty Foundation -- http://americanlibertyfoundation.org/ More of his articles can be read at HarryBrowne.org -- http://www.harrybrowne.org/ and his books are available at HBBooks.com. Source: WorldNetDaily (US Web)Author: Harry BrownePublished: November 27, 2001Copyright: 2001 WorldNetDaily.com Inc.Contact: letters worldnetdaily.comWebsite: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/Related Articles:Leahy, Hatch Seek Ashcroft Testimony on Libertieshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11424.shtmlJohn Ashcroft Declares War On Non-Terrorists http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11361.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #6 posted by Lehder on November 28, 2001 at 12:57:31 PT media and debate I think kaptinemo is right: We didn't necessarily need Browne elected to make a great difference - though I would certainly have liked that. If he had been allowed only to participate in the "debates" we would have been far better off today with respect to drug policy and everything else. As it was there was no debate at all. Now dissent of any kind is intolerable, and Bush's press secretary admonishes us, "Watch what you say."So backward are our leaders' concepts of public discourse that we must have the Emir of Qatar, whose country hosts the al-Jezeera TV station, explain the principles of objective news coverage to the U.S., and the director of the International Press Institute in Vienna feels obligated to write Colin Powell explaining the same. This latter organization, headquartered in the previous century's focus of anti-Semitism, sends only the first of many sharp rebukes that will descend to us from Euopeans who learned the effects of propaganda and intolerance at the highest price.http://www.mg.co.za/mg/za/archive/2001oct/features/22oct-watch.htmlOur smirking and high handed leaders know nothing of history or the fate that awaits them, and they're guaranteed to fall. International criticism will grow so voluble that it cannot be shunned by our media no matter what their orders. Yet even then, only a series of failures - military, economic or both - will convince Americans of our government's folly. I only hope that these failures come swiftly, and that foreign cultural and political leaders increase their pressure as they do; otherwise, reform will be supervened with catastrophic political and economic collapse as in so many tyrannies preceeding us. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by QcStrt on November 27, 2001 at 20:43:34 PT >>1950's this is worst then the 1950's when we had witch hunts for the COMMUNIST people.and people lives where destroyed by the GOVERNMENT back then. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by Sandino on November 27, 2001 at 17:56:55 PT: Harry the Man I am also very happy and proud to say that I voted for this man: Harry Browne. A man who really beleives in truth, justice and freedom, very much unlike the 100% sold out whoring republowcrats, who at this time are doing us all in. Think,Register and Vote "Libertarian".... S.A. Homes [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by Shishaldin on November 27, 2001 at 17:28:59 PT Me too... Yep, Harry's got some brass cojones and tells it like it is. I've never heard anything that he's said (from various radio shows, LP newsletters, etc.) that wasn't well researched and thought out. Not to mention the TRUE passion and TRUE patriotism for his country that he demonstrates by word AND deed. When I grow up, I wanna be like Harry....peace and strength, Shishaldin [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by mayan on November 27, 2001 at 16:57:21 PT Hats off to Harry! I hear ya' Kap'n. I'll never regret having voted for Browne either. Harry would've made the shrub & Bore look so ridiculous. That's why the Commission on Presidential Debates wouldn't let Browne or Nader in. That Commission just happens to be headed by both of the former heads of the Republican & Democratic National Committees. I don't know who the Lib's man will be in '04' but it probably won't be Browne, & Russel Means is now running for Governor of New Mexico. Might have to go Green, but that's a ways off. I figure by then the herb will,at the very least, be decriminalized in Britain,Canada & Jamaica. There will be many Americans & their money going to these countries to escape the new tyranny & experience greater freedoms. Drug policy could be a big issue in '04' & the Republicrats won't be able to duck it this time around. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by kaptinemo on November 27, 2001 at 16:28:11 PT: I am so glad I voted for this man And I feel very sorry for a nation that never had a chance to hear him debate Tweedledick and Tweedledork. We probably wouldn't be in this mess if he had. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment