"Standing armies consist of professional soldiers who owe their livelihood and income to the government. Unlike civilians who render periodic service in local militia, professional soldiers do not own property and therefore do not have any source of income other than the government’s military paymaster. Thus, they are more likely to serve the government’s interests, regardless of whether its leaders are dishonest and corrupt or not. In fact, standing armies may even promote rapacious foreign or domestic policies if such policies enrich the army. In contrast, arms bearing, property owning citizen militiamen have a stake in the health of the republic as a whole and can be trusted to act in the republic’s best interests, whether those interests call for action in support of or against the political leadership of the nation." ~ Anthony Dennis
The PATRIOT Game Begins Again
I got a letter from a friend just today which told me that there was something I should read. He included a link to this site, and I got an eyeful. When I got done staring angrily at the wall, I wrote him back. This is what I said.
First thought: Oh God, I'm moving to Canada .
Second thought: OH, GOD!! I'm moving to Canada .
Third thought: Batardes Stupides! (pardon my French)
But on fourth thought . . .
Passing this new act with no review or debate is illegal, but no one seems to care any more. If someone from a senator's district cares about liberty and calls the senator on it when he comes up for re-election that senator can claim that he just didn't know what was in the bill and was only thinking of the welfare of his constituents. Voila, he's absolved from blame. That move was necessary to protect everyone voting for it, and necessary to get it passed. The American people may be sheep, but some of them still get uppity when one talks too blatantly about violating natural rights.
I wonder who comes up with these plans. Not the child on the throne, surely. And to pass it as a rider on a bill which I am sure is pork laden doubly ensures passage. Someone is putting his rather nefarious brand of intelligence to bad use.
"Under Section 501 a US citizen engaging in lawful activities can be grabbed off the street and thrown into a van never to be seen again. The Justice Department states that they can do this because the person 'had inferred from conduct' that they were not a US citizen."
Gorgeous. So they can perform mass arrests on "dissenters." Anti-war activists, Greenpeace environmentalists, you name it. Gorgeous. Hey, why don't they arrest me? I'm a decent candidate.
"These sections also set up a national DNA database for anyone on probation or who has been on probation for any crime, and orders State governments to collect the DNA for the Federal government."
The Stasi did that, too. They just didn't have the right technology to do it effectively. When the newly liberated East Germans broke into Stasi headquarters there were millions of little jars with pieces of cloth in them holding the scent of all who were suspected of illegal activity so the police could use dogs to track them down. Using DNA to track people down isn't all that different, and it sure works better.
Of course, most crimes have little to do with terrorism. So someone gets on parole for driving drunk on a couple occasions. Dangerous? Sure, to motorists. Terrorist? No. Oh wait, yes he is. The definition of terrorism is "any action that endangers human life that is a violation of any Federal or State law." Jaywalking is a "violation of any Federal or State law," too. So all jaywalkers are terrorists? That's rich. Batardes stupides.
". . . immunity to law enforcement engaging in spying operations against the American people."
That's evil. And terrorist. This might be 'cutting off our nose to spite our face' if these laws would really work to stop terrorists. The problem is that the laws won't stop terrorists. We're turning into a Soviet-style dictatorship for nothing. Very heartening thing, it is.
"...allows the Federal government to use wartime martial law powers domestically and internationally without Congress declaring that a state of war exists."
Now this one is obvious. It makes you sick, until you realize that it's actually happening in an actual country you (well, I) live in. Then it gets maddening.
And the final question is what to do about it. I can get angry, I can tell others that this sort of thing is going on, and then what? There is no way to get enough offending Congressmen out quickly enough to make a difference. No one in Congress would make any move to impeach the president. (Bill Clinton, where are you now? And we thought you were bad. Alas for innocence.) Those cretins Shrub appointed to the Cabinet can not be touched in any way by the people or their "representatives." So. Stuck? At least I can say "I told you so . . ."
Well, no despair. Maybe getting angry and telling others will suffice on my part? For if there is any right or power not corrupted in this country, it is surely in the hands of the people.
Or so they teach us in school.