insurgent49
  updated weekly
 home - submissions - donate -  message board - events - links - contact us - archive
January 27, 2006
The Bramble Bush
by Kevin Morford

Dictating Safety

     The Bush/Cheney cabal insist that they need to be able to kidnap and torture suspects without judicial oversight, and to tap phones without a warrant, and to engage in all kinds of other patently illegal activities, because it will make us safer from terrorists.

     It is possible (but far from certain) that some of those activities will help protect us from terrorists. I certainly do not concede the point. But even if some of what Bush and Cheney claim is true, it does not follow that they should therefore be allowed to commit these crimes.

     There are lots of other crimes which Bush and Cheney could commit which would also make us safer. They could impose a system of internal passports which prevent all persons including citizens from traveling anywhere in the country, except as specifically authorized by their particular passport. It would not be constitutional, but it would make us safer from terrorists.

     They could put police and national guard troops armed with machine guns on major street corners, and set up road blocks for systematic searches on all highways. Again, not constitutional, but there would be less risk of a terrorist attack.

     They could implant GPS tracking devices in every single person who was physically present on territory controlled by the United States, so they could track the physical whereabouts of every person at all times. They could even equip those devices with microphones and transmitters, so that they could listen to every conversation. That would make us safer from terrorists.

     There are examples from all around the world where draconian security measures have been implemented. These are usually justified by a claimed desire to protect against one type of threat or another. We know what life in those places is like, and it isn’t pleasant. The harsher the security measures are, the more miserable the lives of the people are. Go to Sudan, or Nigeria, or Uzbekistan, and see if that is how you want our lives to be lived here.

     Of course, we also know that the real reasons for these measures are to ensure that the persons who control the security measures remain in power. It is a system with a positive feedback loop, because the abuses perpetrated as security measures breed resentment, and increase the need for more security measures.

     These examples illustrate that there are very heavy costs associated with the current assault on our constitutional rights. For a marginal and speculative increase in safety against a threat that has killed a relatively small number of people, the Bush/Cheney cabal have unilaterally decided to engage in massive and unchecked violations of our constitutional rights. This is a concerted and very dangerous assault on the very structure of our constitutional form of government.

     There is a very practical reason why the other security measures listed above have not been adopted to make us safer ... at least not yet. It is because they would adversely impact the lives of large numbers of citizens. Most of the constitutional violations which have been implemented so far are either not noticeable in everyday life, or are directed against a small and unpopular minority. People are much less likely to object when it is not their own lives being trashed, and when they are not aware that they are also targets. The more intrusive security measures described above can wait for another day, when power has been further consolidated.

     Tyrants almost always start by attacking small and unpopular minorities. Once they have established the precedent that such attacks are permitted, they move on to greater and greater atrocities. Our government has been taken over by ideological demagogues who are intent on replacing a government of checks and balances with a government where the president has no limits on his power.

     Heil Bush!














Kevin Morford is a political activist and an attorney in private practice in the Anchorage area.  He can be reached at kmorford@insurgent49.com.
- Columnists -

Editor's Desk
by Aaron Selbig

Red Alert
by Soren Wuerth

Alaskan In Exile
by Neil Zawicki

The
Bramble Bush
by Kevin Morford





Copyright 2005 Insurgent Media. All Rights Reserved.
in-sur-gent (in sur'jent), n. 1. a member of a group which revolts against the policies of its leadership.