Oppose the New Homeland Security Bureaucracy!

LewRockwell.com ^ | 13 Nov 02 | U.S. Rep. Ron Paul

[SmithW]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul61.html

[SmithW]

Some insight on the 484-page bill being rushed through - FYI

[Commander8]

Instead of creating a new bureaucracy, why not take the handcuffs off the FBI and bring back COINTELPRO?

[sinkspur]

No insight, just more of the same from Ron Paul. That he would allow himself to be published on lewrockwell.com, one of the bitterest anti-American sites on the web, is disappointing.

[Pee_Oui]

This bill is "FAR" to intrusive for me.

Read the article in the Washington Post http://www.washtimes.com/national/20021116-49755.htm

If this thing passes, we will officially become a "police state".

I for one will not be forced to take innoculations "big brother" thinks I NEED.

The AAP (American Association of Physicians) say "NO" also to this bill. They are against this intrusion in our privacy also.

Bush is going toooo!!! far this time.

D

[sinkspur]

If this thing passes, we will officially become a "police state".

Everybody told me when Campaign Finance Reform passed that we were a "police state." You mean Homeland Security makes it "official"?

My head is spinning with all the doom-and-gloomers on Free Republic telling me how each and every thing that comes down the pike is going to make my life miserable.

When can we be "officially" miserable?

[Skwidd]

Wait waitiwaitwait WAIT! I thought when the Republicans took over Congress, we became a police state!

Dammit, I keep voting for this police state over and over, and it never seems to get here!!! WHY?!?!?!

[/sarcasm]

[PatrioticAmerican]

I guess the Department of Defense has become the Department of Defense For Other Nations Only. How many of our soliders and intel resources go to other nation's defense and not our own? When will we call North Korea's bluff and bring back our soldiers from South Korea, daring them to even think about invading South Korea? Fifty years is plenty long for a so-called "truce", and certainly long enough for South Korea to learn to defend her own damned borders.

[Seruzawa]

If it's like any other bureaucracy it simply will be hopelessly ineffective. Why should this new bureaucracy be any different than every other bureaucracy in the history of the world? Who on earth is dumb enough to believe that some new bureaucracy is going to be some sort of salvation?

[Illbay]

Oppose the Anti-American Hagiography!

(FWIW, there is no "new bureaucracy." It's a streamlining of the OLD bureaucracy. As long as the adults are in charge, it's going to work).

N.B. I can just imagine what LewRockwell.com would have had to say about the WWII "bureaucracy."

But when you hate America, you hate everything ABOUT America, I guess.

[Illbay]

Yes, you're going to take the innoculations, because we don't have time to worry about your *ss, and you're not going to pose a threat to public health by being a carrier.

We're at war. Get used to it, or get the h*ll out.

[Joe Hadenuf]

As long as the government continues to leave the doors and windows wide open to our house, there will be no Homeland Security.

[Illbay]

I don't think it's going to be "salvation," but I do think it's going to have to come to pass. When you boil down the functions of the Federal government, it's only real reason for being is to protect us from all enemies foreign or domestic.

There are so many aspects of the government to oppose on Constitutional grounds. This is one that a strict Constitutionalist can't possibly object to.

[rwfromkansas]

BTW, the scare-mongering done by Safire has found to be an outright lie.

[anniegetyourgun]

For these folk, we have been in a police state from the moment women were given the franchise!

[willingtodie]

BTW, the scare-mongering done by Safire has found to be an outright lie.

I hope that's true. Please cite sources.

[rwfromkansas]

Nightline.

[Seruzawa]

This is one that a strict Constitutionalist can't possibly object to.

Only if that "strict constructionist" never bothered to read the first or fourth amendments.

[Illbay]

Okay, explain yourself. Where are the first and fourth amendments in peril here?

Were they similarly imperiled when the FBI prowled around America during WWII, checking up on allegations of loose talk and making sure the war effort wasn't strangled by people mistaking foolishness for freedom?

You people who talk this way: Your fellow travelers are people like Ralph Nader and Nancy Pelosi.

Go stand over there with them, we don't need you here.

[Seruzawa]

Pretty free with accusations or traitor aren't you? Well, people generally see themselves in others.

Chickenhawk.

[iconoclast]

When can we be "officially" miserable?

Oh that's quite a ways down the road. Most aren't even close to shocked disbelief yet.