Interesting People mailing list archives
more on Dan Gilmore: Four Years of Lost Liberties
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:41:42 -0400
Begin forwarded message: From: dmcknight15 () comcast net Date: October 29, 2004 12:05:30 AM EDT To: dave () farber net Subject: RE: [IP] Dan Gilmore: Four Years of Lost Liberties Far more Native Americans died of European diseases than by European weapons. Their immune systems were not prepared for the onslaught of smallpox and other such foreign diseases.Likewise, to a terrorist our country must appear as a body ill-prepared for the damage he can inflict. It is so easy to sit at one's computer and type out an armchair quarterback column that Dan has published. In a vacuum, the
actions the president has taken are certainly inimical to our cherishedfreedoms. I too am queasy about certain provisions of the Patriot Act and I
too have disagreed with the president on a number of his decisions.However, I don't see much of his policy as permanent in nature, and I feel comfortable with the president's motivation for taking the actions that he
has.Perhaps Dan was in New York after the 9/11 attack on our country. Perhaps
he helped search for victims in the rubble. Perhaps he donated money orblood or sent supplies or even prayed for them. However, he doesn't have the responsibility of the government on his shoulders for two enormous tasks that the attacks precipitated: justice for the victims and the prevention of further attacks against the country. My guess is that if he had been in the president's shoes, he would have taken many of the same actions that the president did. We can all see in hindsight that the actions taken by the
Clinton administration in the wake of the Cole bombing and the African embassy bombings were clearly inadequate. The 9/11 attack called fordrastic actions. We certainly have a duty to offer our support, ideas and prayers in support of the president's actions. We can even be critical of actions planned or taken, as long as such criticism is constructive, offers alternatives, weighs both costs and benefits and keeps firmly in mind what our goals should be. Partisans who exploit these dangers for political gain
are demagogues.We live in a dangerous world today. As technology progresses, it will get
increasingly dangerous. We have seen how technology has increased thekilling power of weapons, with fewer people needed to wield them. We can
already imagine a dirty nuclear bomb being detonated in the middle of a large city, not only killing many people, but rendering much of the cityvirtually inhabitable for centuries. Five to ten years from now, I can see
these trends only getting worse, requiring greater political will to control. Freedom is always in tension with security. Our nation has a long legal history of restricting freedom when the security of the nation is threatened. The greatness of our nation lies in the fact that we love freedom so much that we hate its restriction even in times of war, andeagerly cast aside such restriction when the danger has passed. However, we must not delude ourselves in thinking that since there hasn't been another attack on our soil that we are no longer in danger. If we weren't taking
the fight to them, they would certainly be taking the fight to us.Dan is right that we need to be concerned about where technology is taking us with regard to our privacy and our freedoms. I love the intense exchange of ideas about these very issues in Mr. Farber's IP listserve. Apparently unlike Dan, I believe that the vigorous debate we see, here and elsewhere,
will eventually reconcile, as much as possible, our freedom and our security. DeLoss McKnight III -----Original Message-----From: owner-ip () v2 listbox com [mailto:owner-ip () v2 listbox com] On Behalf Of
David Farber Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 7:31 PM To: Ip Subject: [IP] Dan Gilmore: Four Years of Lost Liberties Four Years of Lost Liberties posted by Dan Gillmor 08:02 AM http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillmor/archives/010960.shtml (This is also my column today in the San Jose Mercury News.) If you believe that political and social liberty go hand in hand with economic freedom -- and that they form an underpinning of a vibrant free market -- you should be worried about another four years like the four we've just had. Let's grant that George W. Bush plainly believes in a free market, largely unconstrained by government intervention. But he has made it clear that he doesn't have the same devotion to other kinds of liberty. He and his allies have used terrorism to launch a massive assault on civil liberties. They are not just indifferent to liberty, they are actively hostile to it. Bush's first term has been a catalog of encroachments. He has expanded surveillance -- electronic and otherwise -- without adequate safeguards. He has had a mania for secrecy, shielding more and more government information from public view. This amounts to telling Americans they have no right in many cases to know how our money is being used or what government is doing in our names. This president has curbed dissent through intimidation. His attorney general practically labeled as traitors people who questioned the outrageously named ``Patriot Act,'' for example. More recently, the Bush forces have excluded anyone who is not a declared supporter from being even in the vicinity of campaign events, and have even fenced off protesters in Orwellian ``free speech zones'' far from the scenes. The Bush years have emboldened rights and privacy invaders everywhere. A national ID card is making a back-door entrance via a scheme by the state agencies that issue driver's licenses, for example. He has given corporate interests carte blanche to buy, sell, massage and trade our most personal information -- mocking his vows in the 2000 campaign to be a president who would protect privacy. The federal government now encourages (and buys) all kinds of data collection and ways to manipulate it, and offers barely a hint of safeguards. Do you imagine for even a second that the radio-chip ID implants being sold to track patients inside hospitals won't be used for much broader kinds of surveillance someday? Ditto the radio tags the government says it wants to put into our passports (and soon, no doubt, our driver's licenses). Surveillance is big business now. Insidiously, the Bush administration has turned the corporate data mongers into partners in the dawning surveillance state. Evading even the most trivial safeguards, including federal laws protecting privacy, it buys or uses data collected by private companies that are under no such restrictions. An intrusive airline passenger screening system, relying on commercial data and other information, was officially scrapped after protests. But as the Washington Post reported earlier this month, one of the former government officials behind that project has launched a private company that will collect and provide data for the project's new incarnation -- and established the company offshore in Bermuda, ``outside the reach of U.S. regulators.'' The most frightening assault on liberty has had nothing to do with the Patriot Act, surveillance or privacy. Bush has systematically ignored the law when it suited his purpose, treating the Constitution as a suggestion box, not the bedrock of liberty. He asserted the right to declare American citizens as enemy combatants here at home and to jail them indefinitely, with no right even to see a lawyer. The Supreme Court, thankfully, rejected Bush's dictatorial views in two pivotal decisions earlier this year. But presidents nominate justices, and this one means to nominate the kind who will let the government do pretty much what it pleases. Early last week, William Rehnquist, chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, had surgery for thyroid cancer. His condition reminded people that whoever is president during the next four years will probably nominate three or four justices to the highest court. A court with two, three or four judges of Bush's preference would not be friendly, on balance, to our rights as individuals. The president has made clear his intention to appoint judges who would overturn abortion rights. That, too, is a question of liberty. Is John Kerry any better? He voted for the ``Patriot'' law, after all. But while Bush vows to expand that law's reach over our lives, Kerry has said he would work to repeal some of the more odious provisions, such as the one that lets government agents rifle through our lives -- including what library books we read -- with few safeguards. I believe that a free economy rests in large part on people's willingness to feel free -- to take chances, to be different from others. The surveillance state is a conformist state, where a fog of fear deadens initiative and the willingness to take risks. No sane person wants to make law enforcement impotent. But risk is part of a free culture, and the more we clamp down on things that have any element of risk the more we clamp down on freedom itself. -- Robert J. Berger - Internet Bandwidth Development, LLC. Voice: 408-882-4755 eFax: +1-408-490-2868 http://www.ibd.com ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as dmcknight15 () comcast net To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ipArchives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
------------------------------------- You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- more on Dan Gilmore: Four Years of Lost Liberties David Farber (Oct 29)