Welcome to the new American Gestapo

Capitol Hill Blue ^ | Nov 20, 2002, 08:32 | By DOUG THOMPSON

[dts32041]

Is it time to shoot the bastards, yet?

[TLBSHOW]

That was Adoph Hitler, writing about creation of the Gestapo in Nazi Germany.

CHRISTIANS ARE NOT SAFE IN POWELL AND BUSH'S AMERICA

[ppaul]

WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES, 19-NOV-2002: US Senate Majority Leader Elect Trent Lott, R-MI, (C) with Senator Rick Santorum, R-PA, (R) and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-TX, talks with reporters outside the US Senate Chamber about the possible passage today of the Homeland Security Bill and the defeat this morning of the Daschle Ammendment on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. A pleased President George W. Bush congratulated the Senate for clearing the way for a final vote creating a Homeland Security super-agency aimed at protecting the country from terrorist attacks. </CLARI-ITEM CAPTION>

[finnman69]

Where is the barf alert?

[FReepaholic]

>>..."We are entering a new era of domestic surveillance," says retired FBI agent Franklin Postel. "One where the constitution is secondary to the cause...<<

Yeah, but who's cause?

[x-navy seal]

Where is the barf alert?

Here ya go!

[MoGalahad]

Christians,committed ones that is, are not safe anywhere in the world nor have they been for sometime now. The Muslims, Modernists, Post-Modernists, Socialists, and Communists are all waging protracted wars against us.

[dts32041]

Getting fitted for your trench coat, Huh?

[billbears]

And that picture is supposed to make me feel safe how again? I'm sorry but Powell and the White House statements on 'extremists' the past couple of days have unnerved me

[CWRWinger]

The conference you attended was probably put together with old information. "Homeland Tyranny" will change what you just learned.

[TLBSHOW]

Powell is a danger to us all!

[newgeezer]

I just returned from a high-level academic and law enforcement conference on electronic privacy, and just about nothing this guy says is true.

Well, as they say, "the devil is in the details." Next time, see if you can get past the "high-level" view. ;-)

Seriously, though, please provide an example or two of any substantive points in this article which you care to refute.

[Savage Beast]

I strongly support President Bush, and I think this legislation was necessary, but Americans have every reason to be apprehensive. Imagine such power falling into the wrong hands. Imagine the potential for abuse by federal agents.

[UnBlinkingEye]

"An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation," the leader of another country once wrote. "We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protect our homeland."

Sounds awfully familiar doesn't it?

[Cyber Liberty]

Someday, in the year 2018, Doug Thompson will learn to give it a rest.

[My2Cents]

"We are entering a new era of domestic surveillance," says retired FBI agent Franklin Postel. "One where the constitution is secondary to the cause. The new department has the power to document the day-to-day actions of any American it chooses."

Well, if you're engaged in something illegal or unseemly, I suppose you have reason to worry.

[dirtboy]

Getting fitted for your trench coat, Huh?

That's way out of line. I've seen so much false press about the contents of the Homeland Security Act that I resorted to actually reading the bill myself (I'm up to about page 300). Doug doesn't make some of of the factual errors that folks such as Safire have committed - for example, he correctly sources these issues with searches to the earlier Patriot Act, not the HSA - but I am interested in what folks who are getting PROFESSIONAL training regarding these new search and seizure powers can add to the debate.

[dts32041]

Depends on what your definiton of illegal is?

Yesterday celebrating National Ammo Day, (bought a brick of 22 long rifle) that could be illegal to preform in Illinois in six months.

I could have smoked in a no smoking zone?

Is that worthy of survelliance with the New Gestapo Act it would be.

But you say it wasn't meant to be that way, and the white house is not suppose to look at raw FIBI's files, no one if i remember correctly was ever prosceuted for that.

[dirtboy]

This article is wildly inaccurate. I just returned from a high-level academic and law enforcement conference on electronic privacy, and just about nothing this guy says is true.

Please elaborate if you can, and ignore guys like dts32041 - some folks here, for some inexplicable reason, believe stuff a journalist claims without pursuing confirming information.