Bush’s Defeated Foe: US Civil Liberty
by
Paul Craig Roberts
by Paul Craig Roberts
DIGG THIS
George Orwell
warned us, but what American would have expected that in the opening
years of the 21st century the United States would become a country
in which lies and deception by the President and Vice President
were the basis for a foreign policy of war and aggression, and in
which indefinite detention without charges, torture, and spying
on citizens without warrants have displaced the Bill of Rights and
the US Constitution?
If anyone had
predicted that the election of George W. Bush to the presidency
would result in an American police state and illegal wars of aggression,
he would have been dismissed as a lunatic.
What American
ever would have thought that any US president and attorney general
would defend torture or that a Republican Congress would pass a
bill legalizing torture by the executive branch and exempting the
executive branch from the Geneva Conventions?
What American
ever would have expected the US Congress to accept the president’s
claim that he is above the law?
What American
could have imagined that if such crimes and travesties occurred,
nothing would be done about them and that the media and opposition
party would be largely silent?
Except for
a few columnists, who are denounced by "conservatives"
as traitors for defending the Bill of Rights, the defense of US
civil liberty has been limited to the American Civil Liberties Union,
Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch. The few federal judges
who have refused to genuflect before the Bush police state are denounced
by attorney general Alberto Gonzales as a "grave threat"
to US security. Vice president Richard Cheney called a federal judge’s
ruling against the Bush regime’s illegal and unconstitutional warrantless
surveillance program "an indefensible act of judicial overreaching."
Brainwashed
"conservatives" are so accustomed to denouncing federal
judges for "judicial activism" that Cheney’s charge of
overreach goes down smoothly. Vast percentages of the American public
are simply unconcerned that their liberty can be revoked at the
discretion of a police or military officer and that they can be
held without evidence, trial or access to attorney and tortured
until they confess to whatever charge their torturers wish to impose.
Americans believe
that such things can only happen to "real terrorists,"
despite the overwhelming evidence that most of the Bush regime’s
detainees have no connections to terrorism.
When these
points are made to fellow citizens, the reply is usually that "I’m
doing nothing wrong. I have nothing to fear."
Why, then,
did the Founding Fathers write the Constitution and the Bill of
Rights?
American liberties
are the result of an 800 year struggle by the English people to
make law a shield of the people instead of a weapon in the hands
of government. For centuries English speaking peoples have understood
that governments cannot be trusted with unaccountable power. If
the Founding Fathers believed it was necessary to tie down a very
weak and limited central government with the Constitution and Bill
of Rights, these protections are certainly more necessary now that
our government has grown in size, scope and power beyond the imagination
of the Founding Fathers.
But, alas,
"law and order conservatives" have been brainwashed for
decades that civil liberties are unnecessary interferences with
the ability of police to protect us from criminals. Americans have
forgotten that we need protection from government more than we need
protection from criminals. Once we cut down civil liberty so that
police may better pursue criminals and terrorists, where do we stand
when government turns on us?
This
is the famous question asked by Sir Thomas More in the play, A
Man for All Seasons. The answer is that we stand naked, unprotected
by law. It is an act of the utmost ignorance and stupidity to assume
that only criminals and terrorists will stand unprotected.
Americans
should be roused to fury that attorney general Alberto Gonzales
and vice president Cheney have condemned the defense of American
civil liberty as "a grave threat to US security." This
blatant use of an orchestrated and propagandistic fear to create
a "national security" wedge against the Bill of Rights
is an impeachable offense.
Mark my words,
the future of civil liberty in the US depends on the impeachment
and conviction of Bush, Cheney, and Gonzales.
November
22, 2006
Paul
Craig Roberts [send
him mail] wrote the Kemp-Roth bill and was Assistant Secretary
of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor
of the Wall
Street Journal
editorial page and Contributing Editor of National
Review. He
is author or coauthor of eight books, including The
Supply-Side Revolution
(Harvard University Press). He has held numerous academic appointments,
including the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy, Center
for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University and
Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
He has contributed to numerous scholar journals and testified before
Congress on 30 occasions. He has been awarded the U.S. Treasury's
Meritorious Service Award and the French Legion of Honor. He was
a reviewer for the Journal
of Political Economy
under editor Robert Mundell. He
is the co-author of The
Tyranny of Good Intentions.
Copyright
© 2006 Creators Syndicate
Paul
Craig Roberts Archives
|