Freedom? We Don't Need No Stinkin' Freedom
The New York Times recently reported that the House of Representatives debated a "non-binding" Republican resolution calling upon news media to cooperate with government officials and not publish secret information. See House Debates Measure Condemning Intelligence Leaks NY Times, June 29, 2006).
According to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, "Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of the press."
What part of that do they not understand? Could it be clearer?. The resolution is as contrary to the spirit of freedom and democracy as anything could be. It reminds us that some very powerful people believe that freedoms should only be permitted when they are not exercised.
Okay, so it's a "non-binding" resolution and it won't violate the First Amendment in practice. But in SPIRIT it is as anti-American as the bombing of the World Trade Center, perhaps more, because the intent is to undermine the very freedoms that al Qaeda attacked on 9/11.
What next? A constitutional amendment to eliminate freedom of the press?
This may be the scariest Congress in U.S. History.
According to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, "Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of the press."
What part of that do they not understand? Could it be clearer?. The resolution is as contrary to the spirit of freedom and democracy as anything could be. It reminds us that some very powerful people believe that freedoms should only be permitted when they are not exercised.
Okay, so it's a "non-binding" resolution and it won't violate the First Amendment in practice. But in SPIRIT it is as anti-American as the bombing of the World Trade Center, perhaps more, because the intent is to undermine the very freedoms that al Qaeda attacked on 9/11.
What next? A constitutional amendment to eliminate freedom of the press?
This may be the scariest Congress in U.S. History.
posted by BuddhistAttorney | 7:10 PM
2 Comments:
I'm sure you've heard that the courts are now refusing to hear cases from people who say they've been abused by our government's new eavesdropping, incarceration, and interrogation policies. Judges are saying that the cases would jeopardize national security.
Ever get the feeling that our government might be putting our nation in more jeopardy than whatever international terrorists are still left?
Every minute of every day.
There are some 40 odd cases pending now in the Courts over government eavesdropping policies. These suits have been challenged by the US, arguing that the interests of national security and preserving national secrets require dismissal. This argument has convinced some judges, but not others.
An independant judiciary remains our sole guaranty against tyranny.
Post a Comment
<< Home