American democracy at breaking point?

[MjM]

I think our democracy is going to be tested to the breaking point by some very dark days ahead and before long. I do expect there to be another major terrorist event. Ports, the nuclear power plants and the chemical factories are extremely vulnerable to an attack. To a considerable event, the war against terrorism has been a hoax because the president has not only spent so much money on the war in Iraq, but because the war in Iraq virtually subverts the war on terror. You cannot reduce the appeal and the strength of Al Qaeda while we occupy Iraq. You can only strengthen it, and strengthening it is what we've been doing steadily for the last couple of years. This is the worst public policy decision making, most antidemocratic and most inclined to be authoritarian, I would say, since the Nixon administration, but Nixon was confronting a Democratic House and Senate and a relatively liberal population in media 40 years ago. John Mitchell and John Connolly and Nixon himself had quite authoritarian instincts, but they weren't allowed to act on them, and to the extent that they did act on them -- it brought them down.

Virtually all the things Nixon did against me that were illegal to keep me from exposing his secret policy are now legal under the Patriot Act. Going into my doctor's office to get information to blackmail me with, wiretaps without warrants, overhearing me--all legal now. The CIA supplied the burglars in my doctor's office with disguises and with cameras and they did a psychological profile on me. That was illegal then, legal now.

I would have said that one thing that Nixon did against me was not yet legal and that was to bring a squad of a dozen Cuban-American assets of the CIA up from Miami to beat me up or kill me on May 3rd, 1973 on the steps of the Capitol. Right now there's at least one Special Forces team under control of the White House operating in this country to take 'extra legal actions'. Now, that sounds to me like a White House-controlled death squad. And that is what the White House sent against me. It's not clear whether the intention was to kill me then, the words were to 'incapacitate Daniel Ellsberg totally'. When I asked their prosecutor, 'does that mean to kill me?'. He said, 'The words were 'to incapacitate you totally.' But he said, 'You have to understand these guys that were CIA assets never use the words 'kill'.'

I think that's the kind of thing we do have in our future, especially when there's another terrorist attack. In that case, I think we'll see enacted very quickly a new Patriot Act, which I'm sure has already been drafted which will make the first Patriot Act look like the Bill of Rights, and the Bill of Rights will be a historical memory.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/033105L.shtml
Also,
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0504/S00009.htm


Profoundly disturbing indeed. WoW this Patriot Act sounds like a real totalitarian piece of work. Why are people not as disturbed as they should be? Why is the media dormant?

 

[clarky003]

The media are most likely dormant because noteably, the media is controlled by corporations which have vested interest's in government's and vice versa... so cut all the crap out and you'll find media outlet's are heavily manipulated or biased towards the people in power. Some people will question at the risk of loosing their job's.. which to be fair is what should be done.. media should be less politically correct and constantly ask the hard questions.

The questions that are on everyones mind.

 

[MjM]

Why dont people use public broadcasters more? If journalists get 30 minute slots, and present a truthful account of a situation, no matter what the politicians and corporates say people will find it hard to dismiss.

 

[Sulkdodds]

WoW this Patriot Act sounds like a real totalitarian piece of work.

Too bloody right.

On the one hand, I'm tempted to suggest you're overestimating the power of the news media.

On the other hand, look what happened to Nixon.

 

[MjM]

You need credibility if your going to stand any chance. With Nixon there was a whistle blower, whose accusations checked out and were taken seriously, because of the media publishing it.

But as its mentioned, the things Nixon went down for, are legitimised by the Patriot Act, so theres less and less that can be done about abuses of power because its legally allowed! The examples given in the article are 'morally indefensible'. But then that is what is soo ironic about this whole administration. They appeal to the 'moralistic' and yet they are the prime supporters for legislation such as the Patriot Act.

 

[Raziaar]

America isn't going to come to any 'breaking' point anytime soon. If it happens, it'll happen many many many years from now, under different circumstances. I don't deny america might lose its position as the global super power, but it'll hardly reach some sort of breaking point. Things aren't that bad in this country. I'm not yet packing up the neighbor's kids into soup cans for times of crisis.

 

[Icarusintel]

America isn't going to come to any 'breaking' point anytime soon. If it happens, it'll happen many many many years from now, under different circumstances. I don't deny america might lose its position as the global super power, but it'll hardly reach some sort of breaking point. Things aren't that bad in this country. I'm not yet packing up the neighbor's kids into soup cans for times of crisis.

seriously, as negative as the overall view of america is from the media they seem to forget to show all the good things going on in this country, but unless everyone in America is completely brainwashed by the media, which seems highly unlikely, then there is no major problem, sure there are always problems, but with the good comes the bad, most people realize this

 

[MjM]

Its not so much about america at a breaking point in terms of power on the world stage. More the democratic processes/privileges are at a point where they are now being undermined by legislation.

None of you have addressed the fact that there is now legislation that legitimises what Nixon and his goons got up to.

This aint about being brainwashed by the media at all. It's one guys perspective on what he thinks is legislation that potentially lets people get off serious abuses of power.

Look at his example's. When he upset Nixon, they sent CIA assets to 'incapacitate him totally', and break into his doctors office to gather documents in order to preform a psychological profile on him. Thats all pretty bad stuff. Pre 9/11 illegal. Post 9/11 legal. That is the point.

If the government starts exploiting these laws as they allow, then you've effectively got a police state.

 

[jverne]

Its not so much about america at a breaking point in terms of power on the world stage. More the democratic processes/privileges are at a point where they are now being undermined by legislation.

None of you have addressed the fact that there is now legislation that legitimises what Nixon and his goons got up to.

This aint about being brainwashed by the media at all. It's one guys perspective on what he thinks is legislation that potentially lets people get off serious abuses of power.

Look at his example's. When he upset Nixon, they sent CIA assets to 'incapacitate him totally', and break into his doctors office to gather documents in order to preform a psychological profile on him. Thats all pretty bad stuff. Pre 9/11 illegal. Post 9/11 legal. That is the point.

If the government starts exploiting these laws as they allow, then you've effectively got a police state.

your right, but the point is that america was never a democratic country...liberal maybe yes, but not democratic! there are no democratic countries in the world! democracy would mean total caos...or anarchy! democracy doesn't have elites...democracy would be something like asking every human being in the country what do they think about a ceartin subject...that would mean that we'd have 295,734,134 opinions in the US...it is just impossible to make a compromise with so many thoughts! the second someone makes an idea and tryes to persuade other people to belive in his idea we come a step closer to dictatorship. Dictatorship isn't ecessarily an one man ledership it can be groups (democrats, republicans)!

people are connecting liberalism and democracy together too much! it's just like with communism and dictatorship! communism is a form of an ECONOMIC system, dictatorship a POLITICAL system! people please diferentiate betwen these concepts!

 

[MjM]

Tbh i dont think your argument even comes close to adressing the point.

Ignoring your notion of pure democracy, the USA is democratic, i dont think there is any real debate about that.

I just think people are allowing the benchmark to be lowered considerably.

 

[jverne]

Tbh i dont think your argument even comes close to adressing the point.

Ignoring your notion of pure democracy, the USA is democratic, i dont think there is any real debate about that.

I just think people are allowing the benchmark to be lowered considerably.

democracy for who? the political elite?

benchmark lowered? please explain?

 

[MjM]

The benchmark being lowered, in the fact people seem to be doing a good job in accepting the Patriot Act.

 

[iyfyoufhl]

The benchmark being lowered, in the fact people seem to be doing a good job in accepting the Patriot Act.

blame it all on south, north is all against Bush, south is the one who runs the country at particular moment

 

[MjM]

Gotta love the rhetoric tho.

 

[Sulkdodds]

benchmark lowered? please explain?

The new Patriot laws allow the US government to do nasty things.

 

[jverne]

The new Patriot laws allow the US government to do nasty things.

yes i know, but it was the people who constitutionized (sp?) it?

 

[jonbob]

It hasn't been constitionalised, it's only an act of law. It's not an amendment to the Constitution.

I don't know that much about US law, but a law can be unconstitutional (until it gets repealed because it is). An amendment is, by definition, constitutional.

 

[Dag]

I think our democracy is going to be tested to the breaking point by some very dark days ahead and before long. I do expect there to be another major terrorist event. Ports, the nuclear power plants and the chemical factories are extremely vulnerable to an attack. To a considerable event, the war against terrorism has been a hoax because the president has not only spent so much money on the war in Iraq, but because the war in Iraq virtually subverts the war on terror. You cannot reduce the appeal and the strength of Al Qaeda while we occupy Iraq. You can only strengthen it, and strengthening it is what we've been doing steadily for the last couple of years. This is the worst public policy decision making, most antidemocratic and most inclined to be authoritarian, I would say, since the Nixon administration, but Nixon was confronting a Democratic House and Senate and a relatively liberal population in media 40 years ago. John Mitchell and John Connolly and Nixon himself had quite authoritarian instincts, but they weren't allowed to act on them, and to the extent that they did act on them -- it brought them down.

Virtually all the things Nixon did against me that were illegal to keep me from exposing his secret policy are now legal under the Patriot Act. Going into my doctor's office to get information to blackmail me with, wiretaps without warrants, overhearing me--all legal now. The CIA supplied the burglars in my doctor's office with disguises and with cameras and they did a psychological profile on me. That was illegal then, legal now.

I would have said that one thing that Nixon did against me was not yet legal and that was to bring a squad of a dozen Cuban-American assets of the CIA up from Miami to beat me up or kill me on May 3rd, 1973 on the steps of the Capitol. Right now there's at least one Special Forces team under control of the White House operating in this country to take 'extra legal actions'. Now, that sounds to me like a White House-controlled death squad. And that is what the White House sent against me. It's not clear whether the intention was to kill me then, the words were to 'incapacitate Daniel Ellsberg totally'. When I asked their prosecutor, 'does that mean to kill me?'. He said, 'The words were 'to incapacitate you totally.' But he said, 'You have to understand these guys that were CIA assets never use the words 'kill'.'

I think that's the kind of thing we do have in our future, especially when there's another terrorist attack. In that case, I think we'll see enacted very quickly a new Patriot Act, which I'm sure has already been drafted which will make the first Patriot Act look like the Bill of Rights, and the Bill of Rights will be a historical memory.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/033105L.shtml
Also,
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0504/S00009.htm


Profoundly disturbing indeed. WoW this Patriot Act sounds like a real totalitarian piece of work. Why are people not as disturbed as they should be? Why is the media dormant?

Totalitarian would be having you disappear if they got suspicions about you, and they wouldn't need hard evidence.

 

[Adidajs]

your right, but the point is that america was never a democratic country...liberal maybe yes, but not democratic! there are no democratic countries in the world! democracy would mean total caos...or anarchy! democracy doesn't have elites...democracy would be something like asking every human being in the country what do they think about a ceartin subject...that would mean that we'd have 295,734,134 opinions in the US...it is just impossible to make a compromise with so many thoughts! the second someone makes an idea and tryes to persuade other people to belive in his idea we come a step closer to dictatorship. Dictatorship isn't ecessarily an one man ledership it can be groups (democrats, republicans)!

people are connecting liberalism and democracy together too much! it's just like with communism and dictatorship! communism is a form of an ECONOMIC system, dictatorship a POLITICAL system! people please diferentiate betwen these concepts!

america is a representative republic, something useful i learned at my uni. Sure the Patriot Act may seem egregious and people are screaming it's a police state, it's Orwellian, but I think we have a lot more freedoms than many other countries like for instance in the Mid East or China. There are many countries in this world in which voicing your opinion is an imprisonable offense, even countries that are allied to the US.

 

[gh0st]

people who complain about the patriot act can never - ever - cite one freedom that they have lost since its inception.

jverne, no one is connecting a political ideology to a form of government. well you are, but nobody else.

 

[Dag]

people who complain about the patriot act can never - ever - cite one freedom that they have lost since its inception.

jverne, no one is connecting a political ideology to a form of government. well you are, but nobody else.

Right. People complain they lose freedom by- Getting phones tapped, or haveing the FBI look at Medical records. Yep, thats really losing your right to complain about the President over the phone, or go to the doctor. People complain that we are now totalitarian. If we were totalitarian, the government wouldn't tap your phone, or look at medical records. You would just disapear without a trace to be tortured and killed because you made a remark that could be connected to the government in any negative way. If this were a totalitarian act, if people got mad and complained about that person getting put in jail, like they do here, do you think they would live a very happy, long life from that point on? Nooooo.

 

[jverne]

Right. People complain they lose freedom by- Getting phones tapped, or haveing the FBI look at Medical records. Yep, thats really losing your right to complain about the President over the phone, or go to the doctor. People complain that we are now totalitarian. If we were totalitarian, the government wouldn't tap your phone, or look at medical records. You would just disapear without a trace to be tortured and killed because you made a remark that could be connected to the government in any negative way. If this were a totalitarian act, if people got mad and complained about that person getting put in jail, like they do here, do you think they would live a very happy, long life from that point on? Nooooo.

you can't really become totalitarian over night in the US!! it's just the first step...the government is finiding it useful to have people on the leash, i could even say they envy the dictatorship countries!

 

[Dag]

you can't really become totalitarian over night in the US!! it's just the first step...the government is finiding it useful to have people on the leash, i could even say they envy the dictatorship countries!

Yup, thats why they split from Britain. And formed a constitution. All in a 200 year long conspiricy to enact totalitarian government. Hey, wait. That sounds familiar, kind of like, oh, I don't know, MGS2?

 

[jverne]

Yup, thats why they split from Britain. And formed a constitution. All in a 200 year long conspiricy to enact totalitarian government. Hey, wait. That sounds familiar, kind of like, oh, I don't know, MGS2?

umm... that not the point, britain was abusing them too much! yes the US was democratic in its roots, but like i've said, totalitarism is getting interesting for the government, not that they have always wanted it!

 

[Dag]

Umm...What?

 

[MjM]

Totalitarian would be having you disappear if they got suspicions about you, and they wouldn't need hard evidence.

How would they know to have suspicions, if they weren't conducting surveillance?

So are you for the patriot Act Dag. I cant tell. I just think its a big step in the wrong direction.

People are entitled to privacy.

 

[gh0st]

Right. People complain they lose freedom by- Getting phones tapped, or haveing the FBI look at Medical records. Yep, thats really losing your right to complain about the President over the phone, or go to the doctor. People complain that we are now totalitarian. If we were totalitarian, the government wouldn't tap your phone, or look at medical records. You would just disapear without a trace to be tortured and killed because you made a remark that could be connected to the government in any negative way. If this were a totalitarian act, if people got mad and complained about that person getting put in jail, like they do here, do you think they would live a very happy, long life from that point on? Nooooo.

Yeah. Your first sentence is a common misconception though -

FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO TAP YOUR PHONE, SEE PRIVATE RECORDS, AND SO FORTH THEY MUST HAVE EVERYTHING THEY HAD BEFORE.

1. A WARRANT (IF APPLICABLE)
2. A JUDGES PERMISSION
3. PROBABLE CAUSE

NOTHING HAS CHANGED - THE PATRIOT MAKES OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM MORE STREAMLINED AND SEXY. CAPS RULE.

 

[Dag]

Thank you Ghost.

How would they know to have suspicions, if they weren't conducting surveillance?

So are you for the patriot Act Dag. I cant tell. I just think its a big step in the wrong direction.

People are entitled to privacy.

How would they have suspicions? They just don't like you. They don't need to conduct surveillance. In Soviet Russia, many people were told that if they could not name 5 people to turn into the government as enemies, then thier family would be tortured and sent to the mines. That sounds like the patriot act, right? Did Stalin do surveillance when he executed half his government? No, he just had "A bad feeling."

 

[MjM]

Wow impressive use of caps.

What it does: Section 215 modifies the rules on records searches. Post-Patriot Act, third-party holders of your financial, library, travel, video rental, phone, medical, church, synagogue, and mosque records can be searched without your knowledge or consent, providing the government says it's trying to protect against terrorism.

The law before and how it changed: Previously the government needed at least a warrant and probable cause to access private records. The Fourth Amendment, Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, and case law provided that if the state wished to search you, it needed to show probable cause that a crime had been committed and to obtain a warrant from a neutral judge. Under FISA—the 1978 act authorizing warrantless surveillance so long as the primary purpose was to obtain foreign intelligence information—that was somewhat eroded, but there remained judicial oversight. And under FISA, records could be sought only "for purposes of conducting foreign intelligence" and the target "linked to foreign espionage" and an "agent of a foreign power." Now the FBI needs only to certify to a FISA judge—(no need for evidence or probable cause) that the search protects against terrorism. The judge has no authority to reject this application. DOJ calls this "seeking a court order," but it's much closer to a rubber stamp. Also, now the target of a search needn't be a terror suspect herself, so long as the government's purpose is "an authorized investigation ... to protect against international terrorism."

Remember one of the pretexts for war in Iraq was that they were evil terrorist. So terrorism is a fairly loose term.

 

[gh0st]

See the government already can (Before USPA) get any of your personal records at will. Theres some fancy legal term like, uh, A SUBPEANA. This is where you and I disagree, but I feel our safety takes precedence over one or several persons feelings.

"an authorized investigation ... to protect against international terrorism."

Key word. There are times when due process must be discarded for immediate safety. Of course the liberals will be up in arms at having all of their freedoms viciously ripped from their cowardly mits - its a complete over-reaction against a conservative regime who is taking THE NECESSARY steps to protect ourselves. The government isnt out to get you.

 

[MjM]

Sounds like your buying into republican rhetoric.

 

[gh0st]

Sounds like your buying into republican rhetoric.

no i simply realize the need for stronger domestic security after 9/11. sounds like YOU are the one buying into lib rhetoric. anything to discredit the right, yes?

 

[iyfyoufhl]

no i simply realize the need for stronger domestic security after 9/11. sounds like YOU are the one buying into lib rhetoric. anything to discredit the right, yes?

i think we all realize the need, but the gov. bullshitted, made our lifes a little bit more complicated and less privite, but i don't think domestic security is any more stronger (maybe some what stronger, because the people themself are more aware and causes)

 

[Dag]

i think we all realize the need, but the gov. bullshitted, made our lifes a little bit more complicated and less privite, but i don't think domestic security is any more stronger (maybe some what stronger, because the people themself are more aware and causes)

And your life has become more complicated how? Now they really check your ID to make sure your old enough to buy that beer? Can't talk to your girlfriend in the supermarket without the FBI hearing every word? And, as you said (And denied) Domestic security is stronger, as people, govn. and all, are alot more aware of the little things that could **** us all.

 

[Lemonking]

Gas has become more expsive due to Bush being dumb ,The Media got us far that
some people are afriad to go out of their house...Im sure theres more

 

[gh0st]

i think we all realize the need, but the gov. bullshitted, made our lifes a little bit more complicated and less privite, but i don't think domestic security is any more stronger (maybe some what stronger, because the people themself are more aware and causes)

I'm all for privacy. But lets be realistic, the previous justice system was NOT capable of reacting quickly to problems. It was very static and inflexible. How your life got "more complicated" I cant imagine.

 

[dream431ca]

American democracy...now a days sounds like an Oximoron.

 

[Raziaar]

American democracy...now a days sounds like an Oximoron.

I think its equally silly, people who claim to be for civil rights, screaming about the word freedom.

 

[Raziaar]

i think we all realize the need, but the gov. bullshitted, made our lifes a little bit more complicated and less privite, but i don't think domestic security is any more stronger (maybe some what stronger, because the people themself are more aware and causes)

My life remains the same, surprisingly. Exactly.