Besides Ray's links and others, consider for a moment the facts that nothing in the new Acts would have stopped the attacks in question: 9/11, anthrax, DC sniper. There had already been FBI and/or CIA spooks involved in each one of these at some point prior to the event. No further erosion of civil rights was needed.
Take a look at each event, and match that with the requested laws. Each section when tied in together with the rest call for greater ability to set aside the Constitutional protections under the Bill of Rights, in favor of unlimited secret powers of the central government.
There might be more confidence of the American people in the Bush administration's efforts to quell terrorism if they actually quelled terrorism. Consider:
1) Greatly expanded terrorism, including 9/11, occured directly after Bush took office
2) The targeted "leaders", bin Laden and Hussein, have failed to have been captured.
3) Failures have attended the anthrax attack
4) FBI and CIA have been implicated in either ignoring, or actively helping terrorists, for example the FBI paid the rent on two of the 9/11 hijackers, and had a minder following them who was an FBI informant. Not a good indicator.
None of the Acts would have helped in any of the above, and the American people are a bit skeptical on what the administration is really up to. It looks more like a series of scripted power plays, chasing Iraqis around, grabbing bureaucratic power, etc, rather than any sort of real effort to keep Americans safe.
IMO |
