Terrorism's backlash is Big Brotherhood. John Ashcroft,
the U.S. Attorney General, is on a political circus swing to try and
bat a homerun for the Patriot Act. His mission is to build
support for anti-Terrorism intelligence. But he's fighting a
losing battle by trying to convince people spying is Vigilance.
He needs a new game plan. Here is a suggestion.
19, 2003—Ground Zero Plus 706
Mr. Ashcroft & Mr. President:
Promote Vigilance Rather Than The Patriot Act To Battle Terrorism
Editor, New York City Combat Correspondent News
GROUND ZER0, New York, N.Y.--Aug. 19, 2003--
The good intentions of government are often booby traps to the civil
liberties of its citizens. At least that's the take on the
attack against the Patriot Act, passed by Congress as the stench of
burning bodies from Ground Zero wafted in the air in 2001.
signing the Patriot Act October 26, 2001
Some claim the
Patriot Act is onerous, an attempt by the government to snoop on the
rights of Americans and violates the tenants of the U.S. Constitution.
To defend the negative press, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft is
making a tour of the United States in defense of the Patriot Act.
Since major portions of the act are set to expire
in 2005, and the rumble and undercurrents against it are a thorn in
the Administration's side, Ashcroft's mission is to try and convince
lawmakers, the press and general public of the importance spying on
Americans is when it comes to fighting Terrorism.
Not everyone is in agreement that giving up
fundamental Constitutional Rights is worth the price.
Congressional representatives are questioning the need for what are
called "onerous" provisions, and striking down as many as they can in
defense of the fundamental civil liberties of both Americans and those
who stand on American soil.
But the issue isn't really about laws being
twisted and turned to meet the pressure of the times.
The real issue, to me, is about who is in charge of anti-Terrorism?
I appears the
government has appointed John Ashcroft and the Justice Department
in charge of Terror
If you look at John
Ashcroft's mission, it appears the government has appointed the
Justice Department to be the lead sheriff in managing the intelligence
and prevention of future Terrorist attacks. Or, you
can say that the Justice Department wants as much power as it can get,
Constitutional or not, to invade as many sectors of privacy as
possible with immunity.
No matter which way you view the issue, it comes
down to the government assuming the duty and responsibility for
anti-Terrorism. Imagine a pyramid and put government at
the top, all intelligence regarding Terrorism is captured at the apex
and flows down.
That's the rub.
Ashcroft's efforts to bring positive spin to the
Patriot Act will take him to Pennsylvania, Michigan and Ohio where he
will argue for full support of the Act. Philadelphia and
Detroit have passed resolutions opposing the Act.
marked retaliation against the Act throughout the country
President Bush seem to me to be walking the high wire without a net.
From a practicable side, they are trying to control the Shields and
Swords of Vigilance, and the retaliation against the Act is nothing
more than the public's cry that government is not the singular source
of anti-Terrorism, and, that laws that strip the public of certain
fundamental rights may be far worse forms of Terrorism than any
physical act such as a bomb or planes flying into buildings.
Personally, I wish the President of the United States and his
Administration would call out for Americans and the world to become
Citizens of Vigilance, Parents of Vigilance, Loved Ones of Vigilance.
Instead of trying to lobby for
the increase in snooping laws, Ashcroft should be challenging state
and local authorities what they have done to increase the Vigilance
within their communities. Where are the Vigilance
Committees? Where are the Parents of Vigilance Clubs,
What Vigilance programs are
being taught in public and private schools? Where is
the Senior Citizen Vigilance Corps?
What are local
and state authorities doing for Community Terrorism?
What are local and
state authorities doing not only about foreign-based Terror threats,
but also Community Terrorism, the roots of law enforcement?
How are we using our Community Vigilance Systems to cut down on crime
and help suffocate the Terrorism of children growing up to engage in
violence, driven by Fear, Intimidation and Complacency instead of
Courage, Conviction and Right Actions for future generations.
Representative C. L.
Otter, a Republican from Idaho, recently sponsored an amendment
repealing a surveillance power in the Patriot Act. He
chided Mr. Ashcroft's efforts to try and turn the negative tides by
saying Ashcroft's efforts were "to try and regain ground the Justice
Department has already lost." To read the amendment,
But there is fresh new soil to
be turned, nurtured, fertilized.
This is the soil of Vigilance.
Unfortunately, it doesn't
belong to the government.
Neither Mr. Bush nor Mr.
Ashcroft own this soil, and therefore can't hold it in their hand and
squeeze it to gain power.
President Bush nor Attorney General Ashcroft own the Soil of
But they can gain power by giving it to its rightful owners.
Vigilance is a word not heard
in government except by accident.
Security is the cry of the law
makers, but there is a hollow tone to their words, for government was
unable to stop the Terrorism of Nine Eleven, and unable to control the
Blackout of 2003. What makes anyone think the government alone,
without full and unbridled support of the people, can stop Terrorism
with increased security laws?
The greatest law of all is the
Law of Vigilance. This law is about turning Fear into Courage,
building Conviction out of Intimidation, and fighting Complacency with
Right Actions for the Children's Children's Children.
anyone think the government alone can stop Terrorism with
Ashcroft would be far more successful in his stumping were he to
promote Vigilance for the people, and but the duty and responsibility
of Vigilance upon the people, supported by government.
sisters, brothers, grandparents, uncles, aunts, loved ones--all
understand Vigilance begins at home not in Washington.
If John Ashcroft were to
promote the Pledge of Vigilance rather than the Patriot Act as a key
to fighting Terrorism, both his and President Bush's ratings would go
up as Sentinels of Vigilance.
But, trying to flog the
people into believing the Patriot Act is a major solution to the
threat of Terrorism is like urinating in the wind...the only thing you
get is a faceful of your rhetoric.
18--Batting 1.000 Against The Beast Of Terror
- 2004, VigilanceVoice.com, All rights reserved -