Freedom

>>> What basis do you have for thinking that the FBI/CIA/NSA will do better with more money and more authority? Not one government employee has lost their job nor has one government bureaucrat questioned any of the policies that contributed to or facilitated the 9/11 attacks. George Tenet, a Clinton appointee who has been party to numerous intelligence failures (bombing an aspirin factory in Sudan, the attacks on the USS Cole, the utter failure to focus on domestic Islamic terror cells, even after the 1993 WTC attack) is still on the job with the complete support of his new boss: Republican George W. Bush.
<<<<

I agree that we need to reorganize the intelligence communities and I do believe that strong racial profiling needs to be incorporated within... but let's be serious, taking authority away from these departments will do nothing to solve the problem. It will give the terrorists free will to act in any manner they see fit in this country. This hurts all of our freedoms. The Church hearings of the late 1970's took too much authority away from the CIA and (to a lessor extent) the FBI. What's wrong with giving them some of that authority back. There are young men and women out there who wish to kill us.

How can we expect our intelligence agencies to protect us if we don't give them more authority?

How can we expect our intelligence agencies to protect us if we don't give them more authority?

Oh, gawd. Are you serious? Doncha think maybe they had enough 'authority' prior to 9/11, and maybe the failure wasn't the lack of authority, but the lack of competence? If you want to cover up their incompetence by simply giving them more powers to be incompetent WITH, I fear you just really want to be safe. You don't want to be free. You don't want to preserve the quality of life in America that has made it, historically, the envy of freedom-loving persons around the world.

They have enough authority. They need competence.

I guess if you lived in a freedom-hating state, your desire for 'more authority' might seem ok, but we're talking about America. Land of the Free, Home of the Brave, all that. We're not about being so scared that we'll toss our liberties in the trash and give Daddy Gov boundless power just so we can feel 'safe'.

As for being in a war... this isn't a war. We're not fighting against any nation. There are no invasion plans. This endless WOT is quickly becoming a scam. Dubya expressed early on that the WOT would take "years". So expect years of losing liberties. For what return? To prevent the hundreds of suicide bombers that attack our cities daily? To stop the weekly bio-terror catastrophes that occur in our big cities? Where's the war?

While Al-Qaeda IS a threat, I simply don't believe it's a credible enough threat to destroy our way of life.

How can we expect our intelligence agencies to protect us if we don't give them more authority?

I don't expect them to protect me at all. Terrorism would be an extremely rare occurrence if Americans had the unconditional right to bear arms and the right to discriminate (including the right to secure our borders). I'd also point out that without government interference in tribal wars, we would have eliminated the Islamic terrorists' casus belli.

Government intervenes to create enemies faster than we can kill them and outlaws or severely restricts our right of self-defense and discrimination, leaving us with no option but to pay it protection money (taxes) and spurring the more naive among us to approve its actions.

First, welcome to FR. I hope you find the discussion stimulating.

The goal which the CIA and the FBI have is a worthy goal and it can only be accomplished (or at least partly accomplished) with government involvement.

Every government agency I know of was created with the best of intentions. Good intentions mean nothing. It's results that count.

So let's look at the results.

CIA - failed to predict the fall of Communism, arguably the biggest intelligence failure of the 20th century. Failed to detect anything related to 9/11. Other minor failures. They may have some hidden successes we don't know about.

FBI - Cremated children at Waco and got away with it. Illegally shot a woman at Ruby Ridge and got away with it. Sheltered an obvious spy for years. Lots of hanky panky in their crime labs (which were supposed to be the best in the world).

And the worst of all this litany is that no significant changes were made as a result. The clear message to those who are in the FBI and CIA is therefore "do whatever you want - you'll never pay a price for it".

Now do you see why some of us are pretty skeptical about giving such folks more power? Based on prior experience, they won't do anything productive with it. But, particularly for the FBI, we can just about count on them abusing it!

Yes, it's terrible that 3,000 people were killed on 9/11. But what indications do we have that anything on that scale will happen again? Based on the idiots that are now being picked up, it looks like they shot their wad. Sure, there may be isolated incidents like the one in LA airport, but is it worth going a fair distance down the road to a police state just to make a feeble, probably unsuccessful attempt to stop such incidents?

>>> First, welcome to FR. I hope you find the discussion stimulating. <<<<

Thank you. I do enjoy this very much. FWIW, it's much funner to "argue" with people who seem to have a similar morale footing to me than with mindless Demogauges.... errr... crats....

>>> Yes, it's terrible that 3,000 people were killed on 9/11. But what indications do we have that anything on that scale will happen again? Based on the idiots that are now being picked up, it looks like they shot their wad. Sure, there may be isolated incidents like the one in LA airport, but is it worth going a fair distance down the road to a police state just to make a feeble, probably unsuccessful attempt to stop such incidents? <<<

We aren't close to a police state. What, exactly, is in the Patriot act that would indicate that we are moving in that direction?

What I can't figure out here is what you and others on this thread are arguing in favor of. Should the military, for instance, become smaller? Given the inherent problems of the beauracracy upon which the military has been built, should we simply disband the whole thing (like Europe seems to have done)? Do you advacate doing the same thing with the intelligence agencies?

If not, why not? Afterall, they are government agencies and we all know that government agencies aren't good.

My point is that we shouldn't paint all agencies with a broad brush. Eliminating such jokes as the department of Education, Commerce, Hud and HHS are valid responses to bad agencies that I advocate.

If we aren't going to eliminate the FBI or the CIA than we oughta give them the power to do their job. Change them? of course. But if they are to stop a future attack, we need to empower them more than we do now.

What I can't figure out here is what you and others on this thread are arguing in favor of. Should the military, for instance, become smaller? Given the inherent problems of the beauracracy upon which the military has been built, should we simply disband the whole thing (like Europe seems to have done)? Do you advacate doing the same thing with the intelligence agencies?

I don't see the military mentioned in any of my analysis. While there is some inefficiency there, the results of the Gulf War indicate the military is overall doing a good job with the resources and power they've been given.

But you dodged the main issue. The FBI and CIA have not shown similar responsibility or effectiveness. So again I ask, why give them more power when they have abused the power they already have? Why give them more power until they demonstrate that they will hold those who abuse it responsible for their actions? Giving power to government is always dangerous. Giving it to a part of government that has exhibited major abuses and almost complete lack of responsibility strikes me as foolhardy.

We aren't close to a police state. What, exactly, is in the Patriot act that would indicate that we are moving in that direction?

The trend is clear. We now have laws so complex, it's not possible to be a simon-pure law-abiding citizen. That's one ingredient in a police state - the ability of law enforcement to selectively oppress those it does not like because it has a ready excuse to do so.

Then we've seen the 4th Amendment gutted for the War on Drugs - we now have cases with names like "Backwater County vs. $12,432.12". Asset forfeiture is blatantly unconstitutional, but it passes muster in the courts.

The 1st amendment? Well, it doesn't hold if you want to back your favorite political candidate. The 2nd? You've seen the efforts to weaken or abolish it. The 10th amendment is now officially a joke - the federal government can cite the Commerce Clause for anything under the sun and the courts will go along. None of this was true 70 years ago, and most was not true 30 years ago. See the trend?

Our airport security areas would do any police state proud. Have you heard about the guy whose lapel pins were confiscated because they were representations of guns?

No, we don't have a police state yet. But the ingredients are there, and we owe it to our children and grandchildren to fight the trends. If you don't fear the power of government like some of the rest of us, I guess we'll just have to fight that battle for you. You may think we're paranoid. But remember the old saying - just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.

>>> No, we don't have a police state yet. But the ingredients are there, and we owe it to our children and grandchildren to fight the trends. If you don't fear the power of government like some of the rest of us, I guess we'll just have to fight that battle for you. You may think we're paranoid. But remember the old saying - just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
<<<<

I don't think you paranoid. In fact I understand your concern. What I would like to know then is this. If you think that the FBI and the CIA are acting in a way that isn't in the interest of American citizens, what alternative do you have to combat problems posed by Al-Quada and their minions? Should the departments be scrapped or changed in any way? Should we simply accept the fact that people who want us dead be allowed to roam free within the confines of our country?

To tell you the truth, I am more afraid of the exploits of these terrorists than I am of the government taking our freedoms away. I am heartened by the fact that after the Civil War, we regained Habeas Corpus (sp?). After WWII, American citizens of Japanese descent were released from the internment camps.

What other suggestions to solve this problem do you have?

If you think that the FBI and the CIA are acting in a way that isn't in the interest of American citizens, what alternative do you have to combat problems posed by Al-Quada and their minions?

The obvious first step is to clean house. Not one bureaucrat has lost their job over 9/11 (except possibly that idiot transportation guy). Nobody got punished over Waco or Ruby Ridge. Or for egregious intelligence failures.

Bottom line is - how do we know the FBI et.al. need more power if they can't manage the power they have? If there is no responsibility or competence there, then it doesn't matter what we do or what power we give them. They won't do any better.

I'm also a lot less sanguine about the long term effects of giving power to government than you are, and a lot less concerned about terrorists. We loose 40,000 per year to traffic accidents! We loose hundreds (thousands?) more each year in an insane Drug War. (You want to stop a serious number of unnecessary deaths? - Campaign to end the Drug War.) The events of 9/11 can't happen again because passengers will never allow it - that strategy stopped working even before they were done that day, as soon as the passengers found out the score. Yes, we may be exposed to random shootings and other isolated incidents, but is that such a big deal that we turn our entire society upside down and maybe condemn our grandchildren to virtual slavery for it?

>>> The obvious first step is to clean house. Not one bureaucrat has lost their job over 9/11 (except possibly that idiot transportation guy). Nobody got punished over Waco or Ruby Ridge. Or for egregious intelligence failures.
<<<<

Agreed (In fact, I've been stating a modified form of this all along). I'd like to see the FBI changed, not ended or disempowered.

I do think that the terrorists may be able to detonate a nuclear device or cause some other panic in this country if we don't allow the FBI and the CIA to do their job. I also think that beginning the (long overdue) move of nations in the middle east to pro-American, Democratic, Capatalistic, Secular (hopefully) Republics is the only way to ensure greater freedom and peace in this nation. This can only be done by empowering the CIA and (you haven't disagreed with me on this) the military.

Legalizing drugs? No thanks....

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.