Defending Liberty: Fighting Terror and Treason in America

Published by Fred Soto

Bush has recently argued that Democrats are a threat to National Security

This week, he continued the rhetoric and picked up where Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani left off. President Bush warned Friday, that the United States is in “more danger of attack” because Congress failed to extend legislation on domestic wiretapping laws allowing the government without a warrant to listen in on phone calls and intercept e-mails by foreign terrorist suspects that are transmitted through this country.

“There’s still an enemy which would like to do us harm, and that we’ve got to give our professionals the tools they need to be able to figure out what the enemy is up to so we can stop it.”

This is a problem for President Bush, as Americans are learning to fight their fears. Over the last 7 years, it hasn’t been Al Qaida or other terrorists that are frightening Americans with their acts of terror. Instead it is the President of United States that is using terrorism tactics against his nation in order to push his political agenda. His patience is being tried by the House of Representatives, and he’s resorting to his same old tactics of bullying and terrorism to get things done in Washington.

President Bush says Americans are being put at risk by not making previous ‘temporary’ changes permanent on FISA

“American citizens must understand, clearly understand, that there still is a threat on the homeland”

“There’s still an enemy which would like to do us harm, and that we’ve got to give our professionals the tools they need to be able to figure out what the enemy is up to so we can stop it.”

Today, Republicans spent time on CSPAN as well as providing the media a few quotes about House Democratic leadership failing the American people. For Republicans, this is a no-brainer on security, they tend to trust President Bush and even adore him on some levels. On the other side of the spectrum, however, Democrats are increasingly turning against President Bush. There is no trust there and with two thirds of Americans disagreeing with the President’s foreign policy, they now have some leverage to use as they push back against Bush.

Nancy Pelosi publicly sparred with President Bush on the issue

“He knows that the underlying ‘intelligence’ law and the power given to him in the Protect America Act give him sufficient authority to do all of the surveillance and collecting that he needs to do in order to protect the American people,” House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Thursday.

This is something that can easily get lost in the rhetoric that is being spewed from both sides. FISA is still good law, what failed to renew this week were the changes that would grant the President and Telecommunications companies the ability to continue spying on Americans without a warrant. Here’s where the lovely arguments come in to play.

“If you aren’t doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear”

The resistance to this rhetoric is strong, now. It’s the principle of the matter for most Americans. The constitution is losing all meaning. Our privacy rights should matter, our right to speak out in dissent against government corruption should be protected. With President Bush signing executive orders that would allow even bloggers to be silenced if they so much as speak out against middle eastern foreign policies, how could liberty advocates possibly trust government?

“This issue of the carriers that work with our government are increasingly concerned about their liability and increasingly concerned about whether they are going to continue to work with our intelligence officials,” Boehner said.

Is Mr. Boehner pledging his Allegiance to the flag of the United States or is he pledging himself to the corporations? The fact is, we’ve given the president the benefit of the doubt on Iraq for long enough. He led us into war instead of hunting down Osama Bin Laden. The war we are involved in is a war of aggression and we’ve violated more than our fair share of international treaties.

The rules of engagement have been tossed out the window. Given what some Republicans (like Rudy Giuliani) campaigned on — fear — it’s NOT OK to continue giving them the benefit of the doubt. “Remain on offense” they say, without any respect for history or the reasons that have us engrossed in international conflict to begin with. While many Republicans would rather forget that we destabilized Iran in 1953, installed Saddam Hussein under President Reagan and made deals and granted power to Osama Bin Laden, the fact is that history exists. It isn’t about blaming anyone, at the time we had no idea these policies would blow up in our faces (although some no doubt argued that they would). However, this is about what kind of nation America is going to evolve into. The fight that continues in Congress isn’t just about FISA protections or national security, this is about the heart of America.

Dana Perino, the face of the White House, had this to say:

“The Democrats have made a decision that their higher priority — over national security — is taking another recess,” Perino said.

That’s true only if you believe that the President has done nothing wrong, that laws have not been violated, that the Constitution isn’t being raped as we speak. What this is really about is a struggle over the direction of our nation. The debate on its face seems like a continuation of the tired old debate on liberty and security. For liberty advocates, however, this is a principled stand against corporatism and corruption, lies and lawlessness.

The side that emerges victorious on this issue will no doubt help shape our future as a nation. Either our country stands for freedom, defends our constitution and protects liberty or it doesn’t. “Patriots” today only speak of freedom but the United States doesn’t actually practice it, unless you count censorship, invasions of privacy, and guilty until proven innocent the new definition of “freedom.” That said, it’s ridiculous for our nation to travel the world invading sovereign nations, err.. I mean “spreading Democracy.” How can a nation that fails to defend freedom at home “spread democracy” and fight for freedom abroad?