On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:18:54 -0700, Frank Reichert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Good evening Frank! > >Frank Gilliland wrote, in part, to Tim Bedding... > >> I agree, such a statement -is- flawed, and that's why I didn't say >> anything of the sort. You asked for examples of abuse of secret >> evidence. Criminal prosecution based upon secret evidence is a common >> characteristic of authoritarian governments, which is why I noted such >> governments as examples of abuse. But abuse is certainly not limited >> to authoritarian governments. > >It appears to me at least, that authoritarian governments are >largely dependent upon the ability to control the dissemination >of evidence. Perhaps it might be more appropriate here to raise >the specter of just how authoritarianism begins, or rather, its >genesis. Authoritarian governments, and those inclined upon such >a course, usually make reservations as to who, how, and when >evidence has validity. This is increasing the case in fact with >the current U.S. government. Perhaps my example of authoritarian governments was chosen rather poorly........ >Usually in the beginning at least, such "measures" are couched >upon the preface lines of 'public safety' or even worse, >'national security'. We certainly see more of that these days. > >I'm suggesting all of this because I believe that the present >federal government is most certainly 'authoritarian' and in a >sense with the elevation of John Roberts as 'supreme' interpreter >of the US Constitution for the foreseeable future, this may be a >trend we will have to live with for a very long time. Depends on who gets the next seat. But I'm appalled that the Democrats not only failed to block Robert's appointment, but that some actually voted -for- him -- including presidential hopeful Byron Dorgan! >Speaking to Tim Bedding, you wrote: > >> I think you mixed up the cause and effect. The -cause- is human >> psychology. The -effect- is abuse. The type of government has little >> or nothing to do with the cause of the abuse, but if any government >> allows the potential for abuse to exist then it most definitely will. > >You seem, or so it appears, to wish to dwell upon 'human >psychology'. I believe that a more appropriate measure might be >human civilizations as recorded by written history, or human >history pretexted upon various civilizations, which is certainly >a more exact science since we can usually deliver contexts upon >which civilization rise or fall. > >I sincerely doubt that academic historical research can show >anything more accurate than the fact that government exists as a >giant reservoir of power. Raw power, as such, is the very nature >of authoritarianism. Those who eventually control that 'power', >by default hold the authority. Authority is not the same as Authoritarianism. The difference is in how the government rules. A leader who holds authority doesn't necessarily need to rule by demanding unquestioning obedience at the expense of personal freedoms. I'm sure you know that the US government was designed so that power is seperated into three branches of government with a system of checks and balances, so that no one body can wield too much power. It currently appears that the Republicans have the potential to establish an authoritarian regime, since they control the White House and the Congress, and are quickly overthrowing the Supreme Court. But that will change soon and the balance will be restored, as it does from time to time. I should also point out that the government isn't just a "giant reservoir of power". It has a purpose that is briefly described in the preamble to the US Constitution. >We would, as a society at least today, like to believe that is >NOT the case in the United States of America. > >My postulation is that the United States federal government today >is the greatest threat to individual liberty and the threat to >the very extinction of America as a bastion of liberty, for which >it has long been known to be identified. Forget about the >so-called Islamic threat, the Al-Quieda opposition to our very >existence as a free society. The greatest threat to our own way >of life, individual freedom, and the choices we choose as >individual comes from the fact that the bastion of government >power has grown exponentially because of a plethora of false fears. That's a rather cynical statement, but my own opinion isn't much less cynical; it is my contention that the biggest threat to our freedom is public credulity. >Therefore, we have a plethora of 'wars' to justify the >incremental surrender of our most basic human rights. Yes. I can >name several of 'em. We've got a lot of wars that 'our' >government is waging on our behalf. The War on Drugs. The War >against Terror. The upcoming War on Obesity! The War on Poverty. >This list of course goes on, and some tunning in here tonight can >probably add a few more such wars that the federal government is >supposedly waging on behalf of the people. The word "war" makes for better PR. >Truth is, all such wars have the cumulative effect of requiring >all of us to give up incremental freedoms and liberty over our >own lives, families, property, and the way we choose to live our >lives. For me, this is entirely unacceptable! That entirely depends upon how these "wars" are executed. Most are being executed haphazardly. >The Federal government, at least as it exists today, has to go! >Perhaps I should even go further here and even suggest that >GOVERNMENT at all levels, as we know it today, has to go! > >We can never have real genuine Liberty over our own lives, >families and property when totalitarianism and authoritarian >government is allowed to exist within our midst! Totalitarianism >and Authoritarianism at all levels of government must be >completely destroyed and irradiated for a free people to exist. Anarchy is not the answer. If there is no government to protect our freedoms then those freedoms will be taken by others who have less idealistic motives. >When we make the call to surrender our basic liberties on the >altar of public safety or national security, then we have lost >this so-called war on terror. The Terrorists have won! They >have achieved their own objectives in destroying the very basis >of the American civilization based upon liberty, personal choice, >and personal responsibility were the very fabric of our being. The terrorists simply want the US to quit doing it's dirty deals in foreign affairs and imposing it's values on other cultures. I can understand their reasons, but their methods leave much to be desired. >We really need, at least as I see it, to go back and try and >rediscover our own roots for our own existence as a civilization. >I hope there are ways to do that, or even perhaps catastrophes >that force us back to our most common roots against our own will >to usually find ways to escape reflecting upon such things. Have you ever read "The Mosquito Coast"? >I don't believe, honestly, we have much of a choice here. But >then again, the Romans didn't either until is was far too late to >reflect upon the realities of their own time and place. > >Terrorism! What is this nonsense anyway? When American people >become 'terrified' then we have finally lost our direction and >orientation upon which this civilization was built upon. > >I hope we can find a way to reflect upon this sordid stinking >mess as a civilization and take the least desirable course of >dismantling our own growing police state and demand individual >sovereignty over our own lives once again. It is 'least' >desirable only because such choices hurt the most, and are the >hardest to achieve. For those of us who choose 'Liberty', the >choices sometimes are certainly not the easiest or most pleasant >ones to have to make. What kind of 'freedom' forces us to make undesireable choices? ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list Libnw@immosys.com List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
