posted
Yesterday, the news included a reports of a multi-state roundup and arrest of over 300 "gang" members. According to the news, this roundup was done under the direction of Michael Chertoff, who said the effort was an essential part of the Departments function.
Now, I'm not against subjecting these gangs to very tight and careful scrutiny of law enforcement, but I wonder if the members of Congress who voted for the Homeland Security Department had any idea they were granting to another dubya crony secret police power.
I don't like the idea of another of the idiot faction of the Republican Party's loyalty effort (have you forgitten Ashcroft and that almost all of his mad rightwing religiously motivated legal interpretations have had to be thrown out by the Courts as unconstitutional) having the authority to decide on how the law is to be interpreted.
Are they now going to declare these jerks to be "enemy combatants" and squirrel them away in secret prisons in some eastern European country or transport them in the middle of the night in unmarked planes through German airports to Egypt to be tortued, then tell us that we have no right to know what they are doing?
Is this what Chertoff was doing instead of seeing that the hurricane victims had food and water?
Was Chertoff so busy doing police work in secret that he didn't notice that dubya was transfering control of our ports to a Government that finances Muslem terrorist?
Wouldn't that mean that, under the proposals the Administration insist it wants, profits of our ports would be financing the Muslem terrorist that attacked us on 9/11?
And doesn't it mean that the classified information that necessarilly would have been shared with UAE in order that they could operate the ports would also be available to them to share with the very people that attacked on 9/11?
When did we choose to make Chertoff or anyone else head of a "secret police" that is independent of control?
bond006
posted
You are so right bdgee this scares me like you I don't mind criminals taken off the street. But I look at the method as like looking into a crystal ball off things to come and I have learned something about my fellow Americans the last 7 years or so. And I don't like what I have learned they are forgetting that they need to protect there rights not only are we as a people , are not protecting them a lot of Americans don't even know what they are.According to the polls taken
glassman
posted have you forgitten Ashcroft and that almost all of his mad rightwing religiously motivated legal interpretations have had to be thrown out by the Courts as unconstitutiona
even Ashecrof couldn't stomach the NSA eavesdropping thingy tho....
bdgee
posted
An excellent point, glass....
Gordon Bennett
posted
To evil for Ashcroft. That's says something...
glassman
posted
Time Sept. 2002
By MICHAEL DUFFY It is tempting to believe that Bush rose to the occasion last September because flag and country demanded it. But with the passage of a year, and a chance to watch the President in action at home and overseas, it's harder to get away from the idea that Bush didn't rise to meet history but that history fell to meet him. In one horrifying two-hour period, the world shuddered and conformed to his way of thinking: there was good and there was evil, and it wasn't hard to tell the difference. If Bush didn't know much about foreign policy, that hardly mattered, and it may have helped him. Privately, Bush even talked of being chosen by the grace of God to lead at that moment, and perhaps he was. But it was also, as one of his advisers told Time, "one of history's rare unnuanced days." http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020909/abattle.html
Gordon Bennett
posted
I've always thought that 9/11 was the best thing that could have happened for the Bush Administration.
posted