|
|
They've gone and done it, friends. Those of you who said I was paranoid and crazy for thinking like I did in my "Losing Our Freedoms?" essay can now see the folly of your ignorance. The so-called Patriot Act was signed into law after winning wide approval in both houses of Congress. It's tragically misnamed, since there's not one single patriotic thing about it, and in fact, it undermines the patriotism and love of freedom that this country was founded on.
Good name, though. By calling it the Patriot Act, the perception is that anyone who speaks out against it is, by proxy, speaking out against patriotism. That's some clever nomenclature, that is. This is similar to the centuries-dead "Divine Right" of kings, where monarchs would claim God had decreed they should rule. Speaking out against the Almighty was a serious offense when the punishments included excommunication, flogging, and burning at the stake.
For those who aren't aware, the Patriot Act gives federal law enforcement agencies broad powers of surveillance in matters like wire-tapping phones and using software surveillance for internet and email. This is all done, of course, under the guise of identifying and capturing terrorists, but the potential for unlawful abuse is obvious. Interestingly enough, the government had been kicking a bill like this around for a while, but they used the aftermath of September 11th to railroad it into law. I expect our government to be both sensible and responsible – especially in times of national tragedy – but to use the emotional fallout of September's terrorist attacks to convince people to trade in their freedoms for a false sense of security is irresponsible nonsense.
Here are some "highlights" of what is now possible under the Patriot Act:
-- Government agents can collect undefined information about web browsing habits and email without judicial approval or review.
-- Existing state and federal privacy laws are overridden, giving the FBI authority to compel disclosure of any type of records, based on the simple claim the records are pertinent to an intelligence investigation.
-- Law enforcement officials can search homes and offices without notifying the owner for days or weeks afterward. This would NOT be confined to suspected terrorism, by the way. This is dubbed "sneak and peek" authority.
Scary stuff, no? I think the law enforcement powers of the federal government are fine the way they are now. They don't need anymore, no matter what the motivation supposedly is. I think the internet and the capabilities of some people who use (and abuse) it frighten the government, and the terrorist attacks provided a convenient excuse for them to try and get a handle on what they don't understand.
I realize it's hard for me to say these things without sounding like some disenfranchised Ruby Ridge wacko. Trust me, I oppose this new legislation on libertarian and common sense grounds. I have neither an arsenal of guns nor a stockpile of half-spoiled military rations in my basement. Most importantly, I don't live on a fortified farm in the Midwest, with my cows serving the dual roles of beef stock and lookouts for "The Man."
From everything I saw, there are a few basic arguments that claim to support the Patriot Act as it stands now. They are all misinformed and all quite wrong, and I will now debunk them so you don't have to put up with them anymore. Besides, next time some dilettante talks about the benefits of squandering freedom over Brie and imported seltzer water, now you'll have a snappy comeback.
1. "If the Patriot Act would have been in place prior to September 11th, the terrorist attacks could have been prevented." Hogwash. Speculation is easy when you play off a tragedy and don't define your terms. There is no reason to believe the terrorists used the internet or email heavily. Certainly they had to communicate, but has anyone heard of disposable cell phones? Fake email addresses? Encryption? They could have been typing in a 72-point font in the #terrorist chat room on IRC, and with good encryption, we would never have known what they had planned. I suppose it's comforting to think that we would have stopped the terrorists if we were able to secure prior knowledge of what they had planned, but that kind of speculation doesn't help anyone.
2. "We have to do something after a tragedy of this magnitude." And we are. Just ask the Taliban. The last things we need to do are to change our foreign policy, and enact laws that strip away the freedoms that have made this country great for so long. When we do that, the terrorists have won. The Germans and Japanese couldn't beat us, the Russians couldn't beat us, the British couldn't beat us when we stuffed their colonial laws right in their faces, but the terrorists will win if we let them. If we change our way of life, they've won. Instead of trying to watch everyone and give the government more powers to abuse, we need to go right on being Americans, go right on enjoying the freedoms this country was founded on, and flip the bird to terrorists everywhere.
3. "If you're not a terrorist, you have nothing to hide." Balderdash. Pure rubbish. I'm not a drug dealer, but I don't want the government poking around in my house, looking for something they think might be there. I also have nothing to hide on my PC, but I don't want the government reading my email and monitoring where I go on the web. I realize they're only supposed to use these powers for suspected terrorists, but sweeping powers are easily abused. This is why I support the conservatives' cries for less government. Stay out of my house, stay out of my Inbox, get away from my browser, and just spend my hard-earned tax dollars studying the mating habits of Kenyan frogs. This is a childish argument along the lines if, "All the other kids are doing it, so why can't I?" It doesn't work on most parents, and it sure doesn't work on me. If all the other kids jumped off a bridge, would you? Heck, go ahead. Just take a bunch of government types with you.
4. "There is a four-year ‘sunset clause' where the powers are up for Congressional review and can be taken away." That's just in there to appease the cynics. All law enforcement agencies have to do is cite a bunch of ongoing investigations – which could legitimately take years – and Congress could not rationally repeal the granted powers. Damn, they can even snoop around on people's computers and walk into their homes to manufacture some "investigations" for Congress. Isn't that just nifty? Do you see why I'm distrustful of this whole setup?
Really, I'm not a paranoid, anti-government wacko. I do, however, think the government has quite enough power as it is, and capitalizing on the country's grief to ram a bill like this through is terrible. Nothing in the Patriot Act would have prevented the terrorist attacks. Nothing. Americans are gladly – and quite stupidly – trading their freedoms for a false sense of security.
As a friend of mine recently said: if you want security, try looking in the grave.
Dr. Tom
30 October 2001