|
Writing on the Stall
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. |
|
 Liberty: the Going Rate for Security by Captain Willard It was really no surprise to me when the government began debating exactly what legislation would be required to quell future terrorist acts in the U.S. Much of our worst legislation has been established during or after a time of crisis (can you say income tax?). Any half-drunk anthropologist will tell you that's how the story goes. You can look as far back as the days of Samuel, when the Israelites cried out for a King following their continual defeats at the hands of the Philistines. They knew this would cost them their young, their property, and their liberty, but they were willing to throw it all away for a little security. On October 25, 2001, the U.S. Senate passed an "Anti-Terror" bill (98 to 1) into W's greasy little hands. Provisions include expanded FBI wiretapping and electronic surveillance authority (your e-mail if necessary) as well as stronger penalties for harboring or financing terrorists. I tried to peruse this bill via the net. However, our inefficient government lackeys have not yet posted anything beyond the 18th of October. Of course it really does no good to look at these bills due to their convoluded wordiness. I doubt the legislators even know what the bill says; they only know what it will do. What the bill does is simple: it increases the government's authority and decreases our liberty. Most importantly, this heinous act violates the fourth amendment of the constitution. I'm not one to deny the fact that the founding fathers severely underestimated future generations' loose interpretation of "probable cause." The government's been riding on that phrase for years, using it to perpetuate all sorts of injustices. But that's not the point. The point is, we have a problem with associativity. The American public has learned to associate impossible goals with evil acts of legislation. This recent bill is not different. "The anti-terrorism bill has been passed; therefore, terrorism will soon cease to exist." Nope. Sorry, but while the rest of you live in a world where the opposite sex is well-endowed and |
there is no morning-wood, I'll be over here in reality.
I don't know if you've been told or not, but terrorism will always exist. It cannot be gotten rid of by any practical means. Terrorism thrives on hate, which we also tried to prevent via frivolous legislation. Hate lives on as the driving characteristic behind human action. When hate ends, the world as we know it ends. What does this mean? It means the government is using the excuse of an impossible goal to strengthen their dominion over our lives. Will these recent efforts by the government help diminish terrorism just a little bit? Does our zeal for the Bill of Rights disallow useful prevention? Maybe. However, that will not be the lasting effect. Thomas Jefferson writes, "The inconveniences of the Declaration[Bill of Rights] are that it may cramp government in its useful exertions. But the evil of this is short-lived, trivial and reparable. The inconveniences of the want of a Declaration are permanent, afflicting and irreparable. They are in constant progression from bad to worse." So goes the story of our country. At every step, we have not failed to establish more "safe-guards" to the detriment of our freedom and our country's future as a free land. In the last issue, there was some talk about patriotism. I would like to make it known that I am less and less proud to be associated with the American flag. Any government that perpetuates terrorism in its own land [the war on drugs, Waco] and abroad [Grenada, Iraq, et al.] is a government I become wary of supporting. By the Fine People at… more random thoughts; this time about advertising by Cleo Right now I have a jingle stuck in my head. Ride the bus, ride the bus, when you Christmas shop… I think it was part of an advertising campaign for the public transit system in Springfield, MO in the mid 1960’s. I am clearly not that old…how did I come to know this charming little ditty? Again, I would like to blame my parents: my mother actually sings this song as she cleans house. It is such a pleasure that you’ll never want to stop. Just in case you failed to notice, this website features numerous advertisements. One might consider this a necessary evil—after all, we aren’t paying for this little chunk of cyberspace; instead corporations pay the fine people at the “Go Network” to advertise on these free web pages. Or at least I assume this is how the system works…with all my knowledge of computers, I would believe that evil gnomes1 inside my computer hand paint the site directly on the monitor. For those of us who don’t see the half a dozen or so banner ads as a necessary evil or as an example of free enterprise hard at work, there’s always the option of making these into some sort of far reaching metaphor for everything wrong in the world. Which is, of course, what I prefer to do. When I was a child, I had a Snuggle Bear birthday party. There, I’ve said it. The world knows, and I feel better. When I was five or so I actually wrote that furry ______________________________ 1To those concerned: I am not referring to the Cap’n as an evil gnome. I do, however, have a brief list of all the people I do consider to be evil gnomes… |
