Slashdot Mirror
Poll Finds Mixed Support for Domestic Wiretaps
aspenbordr writes "The NYTimes reports that Americans are growing more and more concerned about the tradeoff between 'fighting terrorism' and civil liberties. Forty-seven percent of those polled responded they they did not support 'wiretapping in order to reduce the threat of terrorism'." From the article: "Mr. Bush, at a White House press conference yesterday, twice used the phrase 'terrorist surveillance program' to describe an operation in which the administration has eavesdropped on telephone calls and other communications like e-mail that it says could involve operatives of Al Qaeda overseas talking to Americans. Critics say the administration could conduct such surveillance while still getting prior court approval, as spelled out in a 1978 law intended to guard against governmental abuses."
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Dear Msr. Smith
I'm Sorry your family died in that terrorist attack. We could have easily prevented it if we stripped away this nations civil liberties and freedom. While I feel every individual, painful loss in these trying times and wish they could have been prevented in a reasonable way, I am sure you understand that to take away the freedom of the people of our great nation would be a much greater crime.
Please accept my condolences and understand that justice will be brought to the peopole responsible for these attack. Justice will be brought, and it will be done within the confines of the laws that govern this nation and it will be brought without the loss of the freedom or liberty which make this country great.
Thank you,
President Sensibility.
Not Nixonesque, eh?
What Bush has gotten away with makes Tricky Dick look like a small time hustler...
Congress is not fully briefed on this, that is one of the problems. The other problem is that the FISA court IS NOT consulted, as if even that makes a difference, as the FISA court routinely gives in to whatever internal spying they want to do. Bush has used the Patriot Act to essentially do whatever he wants. This "us vs. them" krap is getting way old...
And this ultra lame ass "I want to live in a fucking police state NOW!" argument of "if you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to hide" is the most UNAMERICAN bullkrap I've ever heard.
WTF is wrong with those who espouse this krap?
For starters, and this is the most important of all, let me break the news to you:
We can't trust Bush.
You know it's just that simple.
Why?
1. Abramoff
2. No WMD in Iraq
3. Diebold in Ohio
4. Outing of Valerie Plame
5. Response to Katrina
6. Fighting like hell to stop the investigation into Katrina
7. Fought like hell to stop investigation into 9/11
8. Abuse of signing statements
9. Completely inept planning of Iraq "war"
10. ad infinitum, etc, etc,
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
I heard an interview on the radio yesterday in which a woman who supported it (an "Ordinary American" said that she trusted Bush because a) he "was a christian" and b) he was only spying on those "other people" from the middle east "where all the trouble is coming from.
This summed up the numbers for me perfectly. For most people Shrub's claim that he is spying on "terrorists" or "bad people" or whatever is code for "people not like you", or "Muslims". Most people who support this do so because they assume that it isn't their phones being tapped and so its okay. Most of them assume that the only would be terrorists are muslims and that they are secure.
What they don't realize is that once this is permitted any law can be broken. Bush can spy on "us" without a warrant just as them. Once we've crossed the line people can start spying on anyone Atheists, Homosexuals, Communists, Pacifists (they already have done this), Mormons... People are comfortable because it is "Us" against "the bad people" and Bush is carefully playing that line. What people need to have explained to them is that they too can be considered "bad people".
Lest we forget prior to 9/11 America faced another unprovoked unwarranted terrorist attack. This attack claimed the lives of innocent Men, Women, and childen to no good end. The attackers: Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols two white, "Christian", midwesterners. Both military veterans with "average" jobs. In short "Ordinary Americans".
Much as people would like to pin it on "The muslims" and attack the middle east again, prior to 9/11 white "Christian" terrorists had killed more innocent Americans than Middle-Eastern Jihadists.
During the 1960's many Americans were comfortable with (or largely ignorant of) the government's spying on Communist Subversives. People accepted crackdowns because it was on people "not like them". The biggest prosecution of the time was the Rosenbergs east-cost Jewish intellectuals. The catch was people woke up one day to discover that the primary targets of government spying were: Martin Luther King Jr., and Rosa Parks. Instead of hunting commies the FBI had gone hunting Civil Rights activists, pacifists, artists, "Oridinary Americans".
Note that I'm not leaving aside A and the long tortured history of despots (Hitler, King Philip, The Kings of England France and Spain...) using the name of Christ (or indeed any religious figure) to justify their crimes. I just think the latter is a more prevelant sentiment.
Now the challenge is, What to do? The answer of course is tell people! Those of us who are Americans must know "Ordinary Americans" who think that this is okay, who trust Bush or who just don't know about it because the trust FoxNews and CNN to tell them "The truth".
Fox and CNN cannot be trusted we have to tell them "The truth", and then tell them again and again until they tell their friends and so on. Shouting online is, in the grand scheme of things pointless. A letter to the editor (takes ten minutes to type) is easy. Printing up some flyers that explain it and handing them out on a streetcorner for an afternoon is still pretty easy, and it'll get you some sun.
An unhappy but necessary conversation with Grandma, Mom, Dad, Uncle Bill, whoever we know who feels that this is "Okay" will suck but don't you want them to know the truth? I personally have an Uncle who told me that his only annoyance with the Iraq war was that Bush "had to lie" to make it happen. The fact that "they hate us" should have been sufficient reason to attack Iraq. He feels that the American People are just too nice. I don't imagine that it'll be asy to convince him (I'm shure I'll hate it) but only convincing him (and people like him) to change his mind will have any effect. Shouting to the crowd online will take time but change no real moods.