| http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/bottoms1.html
Censoring the Internet by John Bottoms They're planning something...I can always tell. And I'm never wrong because, truth-to-tell, they're always planning something. You know how, before the government springs some really nasty new regulation on us, they soften us up with leaks and little tidbits of what's to come, maybe to see if anyone will notice that they're about to screw us big time. If we make enough noise, we hear the old "we didn't mean it" while they quietly proceed with a repackaged version. This time, it's censorship of the internet for political content that's on the line. With the nearly imminent passage of the Incumbent Protection Bill (aka Campaign Finance Reform), they’ll be able to keep those pesky outsiders (citizens and their business enterprises) from interfering with (having some say in) important legislation (regulations they are forced to live under), turning democracy into the big Washington circle jerk they always dreamed it could be. But that's not enough, for our plucky government officials have of late become proactive with a vengeance, if you'll pardon the expression. Washington camp follower Bill Bennett has formed Americans for Victory Over Terrorism to "wage holy war against those who would weaken America's resolve to fight terrorism." While something like 90 percent of Americans have supported the war up until now, only about 50 percent favor the mission creep policy that's lately taken over the Bush administration, and these stalwart guys are gonna nip the anti-war movement in the bud. They remember how they lost Viet Nam in their youth (where they all avoided combat), and they don't want history to repeat itself now that they've got their own precious war to run. But our plucky, stalwart, proactive legislators and ambitious bureaucrats are still not satisfied. They know that the internet is the hotbed of anti-war anarchism, developing intellectual weapons of mass destruction laser-guided at the very heart of The State. They're not going to wait quietly for us to gain strength, they've got to stop us right now...just like Saddam. And speaking of Saddam, our government's respective problems with the internet and Saddam have something in common. It's called morality, an unfortunate inconvenience from their dissolute viewpoint. In Saddam's case, you see, he's never attacked us, and he hasn't attacked anyone since Kuwait 12 years ago. America prides itself on going to war only in self-defense. Never mind that previous provocations for wars either never really happened (Viet Nam), or were manipulated by our government (Pearl Harbor), or brought on a disproportionate military response (Fort Sumter). It's the fiction that we write in our history books that counts, not reality. I'm sure those boys in Washington are wracking their brains trying to figure out what pretext will best sell their upcoming attack on Iraq, and I expect we’ll know what they came up with soon enough. As for censorship of the internet, it's that annoying Bill of Rights, which clearly prohibits Congress from abridging the people's "freedom of speech, or of the press." But there's always a work-around. One of their favorites is to bury some far-reaching theft of our freedom in an innocuous little new and unrelated regulation in the fervent hope that the lapdog Supreme Court will pretend not to notice. That may be just what we're seeing this week, as the Justice Department is "actively working on an Internet strategy to target the Web as a source for infiltrating raves, as part of its crackdown on ecstasy, LSD and GHB." But buried in the fine print of the recommendations is a list of the five groups who should be targeted including "previous drug offenders, legalization advocates, anarchists and people promoting 'an expanded freedom of expression' that pushes the boundaries of the First Amendment." Excuse me! We're seeing some massive mission creep here, as the War on Drugs is about to take a giant leap to controlling political speech. And could they please describe these "boundaries of the First Amendment." Don't give us that tired old "shouting FIRE! in a crowded theater" line, since the fact that it's perfectly legal and appropriate if there is a fire shows that it’s fraud that’s being prohibited, not free speech. Its the usual bullying tactics of The State at work. They're hoping that by threatening freedom and anti-war writers and publishers with censorship, they'll get us to tone down our rhetoric. But articles such as this one presage the kind of "blowback" these strong-arm tactics will bring. And if they ever get arrogant enough to try to shut us down, we'll just move offshore. Freedom-writers are like the cockroach...we'll be here long after they're gone. March 16, 2002 |
