Parting Shots
Peter Baldwin
Issue date: 12/10/01 Section: Opinions
- Page 1 of 5 next >
This article marks the end of my year as MSJ Opinions Editor. I've enjoyed the experience – hearing from many of you, discussing issues larger than UMBS, irritating legions of you, etc. I've spent the last year soliciting the opinions of the UMBS student body. Now, it's my turn. My big book of grievances focuses on the little deceptions, the sacred cows, and the general foolishness that underlies American political life. Feel free to email me with complaints at pdb@umich.edu.
Civil Liberties in the Age of Terror
Remember when GW Bush told us all that America's respect for civil liberties would not be cowed by terrorists? Apparently, John Ashcroft and much of Congress missed that memo. John Ashcroft asks that all of us accept that we're in a war right now, and that means we have to make some compromises. Fair enough. Except that many of the compromises he's asking us to make won't end when the "War against Terror" ends (if ever). The nauseatingly-titled anti-terrorism bill passed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act (USA PATRIOT Act) is hardly a patriotic act. Seems like a classic example of doublethink. Emergency or not, have we ever been asked to sacrifice our constitutional rights to this extent before? It's almost as if John Ashcroft has created an FBI lock box for our rights as citizens. Think I'm kidding? I'd rant on, but Nat Hentoff has done the job for me in the Village Voice - check out his article at http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0146/hentoff.php, (trust me, it's worth your time). I've excerpted some of his piece here:
"Congress has overwhelmingly passed, and the president has enthusiastically signed, an anti-terrorism bill that, as the ACLU says, gives "enormous, unwarranted power to the executive branch unchecked by meaningful judicial review." Moreover, "most of the new powers could be used against American citizens in counterterrorism investigations and in routine criminal investigations completely unrelated to terrorism." (Emphasis added.) Also likely to be subject to this law: "those whose First Amendment activities are deemed to be threats to national security by the attorney general."
Civil Liberties in the Age of Terror
Remember when GW Bush told us all that America's respect for civil liberties would not be cowed by terrorists? Apparently, John Ashcroft and much of Congress missed that memo. John Ashcroft asks that all of us accept that we're in a war right now, and that means we have to make some compromises. Fair enough. Except that many of the compromises he's asking us to make won't end when the "War against Terror" ends (if ever). The nauseatingly-titled anti-terrorism bill passed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act (USA PATRIOT Act) is hardly a patriotic act. Seems like a classic example of doublethink. Emergency or not, have we ever been asked to sacrifice our constitutional rights to this extent before? It's almost as if John Ashcroft has created an FBI lock box for our rights as citizens. Think I'm kidding? I'd rant on, but Nat Hentoff has done the job for me in the Village Voice - check out his article at http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0146/hentoff.php, (trust me, it's worth your time). I've excerpted some of his piece here:
"Congress has overwhelmingly passed, and the president has enthusiastically signed, an anti-terrorism bill that, as the ACLU says, gives "enormous, unwarranted power to the executive branch unchecked by meaningful judicial review." Moreover, "most of the new powers could be used against American citizens in counterterrorism investigations and in routine criminal investigations completely unrelated to terrorism." (Emphasis added.) Also likely to be subject to this law: "those whose First Amendment activities are deemed to be threats to national security by the attorney general."
