Posted on 08/02/2002 2:00:33 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
If Bill Clinton were still in the White House, Republicans would be on the march against Bigger Government and Bigger Spending. Unfortunately, too many prominent Republicans are cottoning up to increased federal control and the increased spending that goes with it.
One of the five components of the Citizen Corps, created by the President in January, is Operation TIPS (Terrorism Information and Prevention System). This is designed to be "a nationwide program to help thousands of American truck drivers, letter carriers, train conductors, ship captains, and utility workers report potential terrorist activity."
Operation TIPS calls on Americans, in their daily course of work activities, to monitor and report "suspicious" activities to a central reporting center. You can bet that all those "suspicious" activities will be entered on a national database available to the prying eyes of federal bureaucrats.
Majority Leader Dick Armey objects; the Homeland legislation his committee just reported out specifically prohibits implementation of Operation TIPS. And the U.S. Postal Service announced that our friendly letter carriers are not going to double as government spies.
When we observe something illegal or potentially dangerous, of course we should sound an alarm, as the airplane passenger did when he saw his seatmate lighting a fuse in his shoe. But common-sense alertness is a far cry from institutionalizing a federal system of informers.
The President's 90-page National Strategy for Homeland Security (NSHS) released on July 16 sets us on the path of morphing driver's licenses into a national ID card, a longtime goal of big-government types who hope that our fears about a repeat of 9/11 give them the opportunity to push this thoroughly un-American idea. Highlighting the diversity of state laws, the NSHS includes a vague requirement to "coordinate suggested minimum standards for state driver's licenses."
Congress actually passed legislation in 1996 requiring driver's licenses to contain a Social Security number that could be read visually or electronically. After the voters found out that this provision would turn driver's licenses into national ID cards, it was repealed in 1999.
The Homeland legislation reported out of Rep. Armey's committee includes this caveat: "Nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize the development of a national identification system or card."
Instead of trying to take over driver's licenses, which are and should be under state jurisdiction, the federal government should be cleaning up the irresponsible way it issues visas to people from terrorist countries. We do need an identification system for aliens with smart ID cards to assure that they live up to the terms of their entry and go home when their visa time is up.
The Fourth of July murderer at the Los Angeles airport was in the United States because he took advantage of the now-expired 254(i) amnesty loophole (which, unfortunately, President Bush is trying to get Congress to revive), and his wife won legal residence through Ted Kennedy's Visa Diversity Lottery Law. A good start on Homeland Security would be to deep-six every kind of amnesty and repeal the Diversity Lottery.
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon were surprised to learn that the NSHS calls for a "plan for military support to civil authorities." Military support, such as through the National Guard, is to include "technical support and assistance to law enforcement, assisting in the restoration of law and order, loaning specialized equipment, and assisting in consequence management."
Those dangerous concepts remind us of the use of the military (including tanks) against civilians that resulted in the 1993 incineration of dozens of children at the Branch Davidian home near Waco, Texas. If U.S. troops are to defend us against terrorists, they should be used to prevent suspicious aliens from coming across our borders, not for police work against U.S. citizens.
Gen. Ralph E. Eberhart, the head of Bush's newly established Northern Command for domestic security, said we should review the Posse Comitatus law "if we think it ties our hands." But tying the hands of the military over civilians is what Posse Comitatus is supposed to do.
In 1998 the Clinton Administration proposed a federal regulation called Know Your Customer, which would have turned your friendly local banker into a snoop reporting to the federal database called FinCen any deviation from what the bank decided is your deposits/withdrawal profile. The American people responded with 300,000 angry e-mail criticisms and the regulation was withdrawn.
The Bush Administration's proposed regulations to implement the USA Patriot Act passed last year are even more intrusive. Some people seem to think it's acceptable to profile the bank accounts of law-abiding citizens but not acceptable to profile Middle Eastern Muslim aliens who might hijack an airplane.
Americans must not allow the 9/11 terrorists to turn America into a police state. The job of the Federal Government is to stop suspicious people at the border.
"When my local city government is involved, nothing sounds (or smells) right. :-(
Posted by shigure to Amerigomag On News/Activism Aug 2 8:21 PM #206 of 224
Another poster says: "I am comfortable with the manner in which George Bush and John Ashcroft are protecting our collective personal rights"
Your reply: ?!?
But wait.. there is so much more!!
Here's a link to the Northwoods Document . The good stuff starts on page 7. Of particular note are sections 8.a and 8.b on pages 10-11.
"Do you anything about International Zoning laws? I found out, after having been hauled before the local Zoning Commission, that our old zoning & code statutes no longer apply because we are now under International Zoning (according to the City Attorney).
But no one at the city's bueaucracies will give me any info about it.
(I worked in a ROW, I met people like you. I know what they have dealt with now).
The last time "we" did that "we" made a major super power out of the then most murderous nation to date, delivered half of Europe into Communist slavery and allowed the most populous Asian nation to slip into prepetual bondage (creating the most murderous nation in history).
I'm just going with the flow here.. not being selective..and your true colors are shining through!! You just helped me to PROVE my points. Thanks..and I'll end this with a few more poignant quotes from ya!!
"I'd give up on Australia if I were you. It seems to be a socialists' paradise and has its own problems with Third World immigrants.
There are, however, some decent possiblities close to Australia in the South Pacific Islands and Melanesia.
Why aren't YOU Living there yet?
And lastly as I am getting tired, even though it is only 11:42pm here,... I will finish this off with a last doozy!! You even MISSED the humor that was intended, and I DID skip to get to this one :o) LOL!
And think of the practical aspects as well. To placate opponents to TIPS, Ashcroft said the program would not maintain a database, but instead funnel leads to the proper local authorities. But wouldn't it just make more sense for someone seeing something suspicious to call 911?
IMO, TIPS as originally envisioned was a way to try and instigate warrantless searches. The Patriot Bill is already starting to be abused. And the Bush Administration has declared it has the power to declare an American citizen an enemy combatant and hold them without due process. Do this combination of events bother you at all? You might trust Ashcroft, but I don't - I think he is the worst member of the Bush Administration, and had a history of twisting the law to suit his drug war agenda before he came to Justice - a trait I do not find desirable in the man who is supposed to be enforcing our laws. And even if I am wrong and Ashcroft is trustworthy, these laws have no sunset provision and do not leave town when the Bush Administration does. Do you really want a prospective President Hillary to have these kinds of powers - a program to gather leads, the ability to eavesdrop without warrants, and the ability to declare someone an enemy combatant and hold them indefinitely?
Case in point - it now seems that the government had the information to realize a terrorist attack using airliners was underway - but bureacracy and political correctness prevented action. We need to realize that there is a role for government in combating terror - but it is stupid to let the feds clamor for more information gathering capabilities (i.e., survelliance), when they had already gathered sufficient information prior to 9/11, but were too inept to connect the dots and act on it. So the posters of this site should tell the feds, quit worrying about TIPS, why don't you instead take all your existing information gathering systems and figure out how to actually use them? There is no practical point in granting the feds more power to gather information when they can't even process the information they have already. That should be OUR effort - and that does not require liberty to be sacrificed. It is no different from the federal government trying to acquire more land when it cannot maintain the land it already has. The emphasis has to be on getting government to learn how to run itself better.
What are the answers here? Should we eliminate some civil service provisions, so that morons who are in the way can be fired? Do we need civilian oversight boards? I don't know the answers myself, but there are a lot of smart people on FR, and we really need to start debating this topic, as Vets_Husband_and_Wife has said - instead of just bitching about government, how do we go about making it work better?
D.C. has to be scrapped, toss'ed in the trash bin, we don't have the time, or the means to fix that mess. The individual States must take their power back from D.C., scrap two thirds of it's agencies, the EPA, BATF, INS, IRS, this will kill off these freakin NGO's and Liberal orgainzations like N.O.W., Million Maniac Moms, or there is no hope. I think that is where our effort should be, and how to get the Republic back.
Nothing has changed much in the past 227 years. The debate over which is more important, liberty or safety, goes on. Patrick Henry asked and answered your question on March 23, 1775, "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" I don't think I can improve on his answer.
As to your patronizing comment that YOU value our FREEDOMS more than us, you are wrong. Hopefully NOT DEAD Wrong..and hopefully people who are naive like you, will NOT bring ALL of us down with you.
You are the one arguing that we should have government informants roaming our society. I just pointed out that government informants are a tool of oppressive regimes the world over. I prefer that we not have them here.
It seems that you prefer some temporary feeling of safety to the insecurity of freedom. As I pointed out in my earlier post, there have been people who thought that way since before the Revolution. I don't fault you for it. I just refuse to join you in that kind of thinking.
We had MORE FREEDOMS 50 years ago? Tell me what they were. Don't spew this diatribe at me without facts.
I am happy to debate this subject. But I want facts, not some emotional dribble that I've heard since the 60's.
Answer me this, what FREEDOMS have you lost since the 50's?
Well, it is hard to know where to start on this one. Fifty years ago I could buy a gun by mail or walk into any hardware store and buy one no questions asked. I could see a search warrant before my home or my records were searched. The search warrant had to be signed by a judge not a "Justice" department official. When the police served the warrant they had to knock on my door and present me with the warrant before entering my home. If they took anything they had to give me a receipt for the items. Before they could tap my phone they had tp present a judge with probable cause. Today they only need to affirm that I am the target of an investigation.
Fifty years ago the government had to prove in court that my money or car were the product of an illegal activity before they could go to another court to confiscate them. Today they just have to allege that they suspect my money or car were bought with the proceeds of an illegal activity to confiscate them. Then I have to prove my innocence to get them back.
Fifty years ago I could get a drivers license without showing my social security card and without getting fingerprinted. Today I can't. Fifty years ago I could open a bank account without a drivers license or a social security number. Today I can't.
Fifty years ago I could deposit more than $10,000.00 in cash in a bank without any explanation about where the money came from. I could also get a post office box without a drivers license and social security number. There are more freedoms we have lost but this is getting long and I'm sure that you get the idea. Today the government is bigger and more intrusive and it grows bigger and more intrusive every day.
I agree a citizenry must always be vigilant. Thats why we SHOULD excercise our rights and go to the VOTING BOOTH. MARCH if need be to get our views heard. Have you attended a rally in the last year or more? During the election? Tell me what you have done to be vigilant?
I've been to more rallies and demonstrations in the past few years than I care to remember. I was at every FR march on Washington during the Clinton years. I was one of the first ones there to protest when Al Gore tried to steal the election. I've been to see my Congress critter and Senators so often they asked if I lived in D.C. I've raised money for the few congresscritters who are working to protect our rights. Over the past 5 years I've written more than 350 columns that have been published and given my time as both a speaker and worker to groups working for freedom. Most of the time I never even asked for help with my expenses even though I've traveled to Washington, New York, South Texas, Florida and New Mexico to speak or help with a program.
I'm a paid member of more than a dozen conservative groups that are working to preserve our rights and roll back government to its rightful place. I'm not as active as some here. I'm sure that I'm not as active as you are, and haven't been to as many rallies and demonstrations as you have. I just do what I can. Ask around, there may be a few here who traveled farther more times to be there when the call went out. But I'm sure there are enough people who have been in the streets with me to vouch for the fact that I do pull my weight in the fight for liberty.
I'm sure that I must have met you at at least one of the marches or on a picket line. I'm sorry that I don't remember. I'll look for you at the next rally or demonstration and introduce myself. I'm sure that we can have a wonderful time discussing our respective views of how big and intrusive government should be.
In the mean time, I think that I'm in good company opposing government informants. Bob Barr and Dick Armey both oppose the idea as does Dr. Ron Paul. I guess you think they are spewing emotional dribble too. But hey, everyone has an opinion. You are entitled to yours.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.