home

The War On Terror Destroys Our Civil Liberties

Nicholas von Hoffman writing in the Observer:

If random searches of people in the subways are being done for anything except political effect, it's nonsense. The decision to search is a confession of helplessness. It is saying that the police and Homeland Security don't know who the enemy is, so maybe they can get lucky and spot one among the thousands racing to catch the A train.

Analyze it: The chances of seizing a terrorist in the middle of rush hour are almost zero. If the authorities had any idea who the would-be terrorists are or where they're lurking or what kind of terror weapon they intend to use, they would grab them and clap them onto an airplane for "rendition" to some far-off place where the ACLU cannot get at them.

The Patriot Act, the bewildering reorganizations of the various federal police and intelligence organizations, the billions spent on electronic claptrap, the studies, reports and surveys by the commissions, committees and agencies have netted us next to nothing in the way of enhanced safety. In the present atmosphere, the suggestion that there may be a disconcertingly large quotient of stumblebums, lazy bums and crooked bums handling our homeland security is treated as little short of sedition. That fact, coupled with the conviction that criticism of the war which is being waged but not won is unpatriotic, leaves us with but one course of action: to go on doing the same things.


I'll just add a little plug for TalkLeft's Fourth Amendment Subway tote.

< LA Times Praises Police Chief Bill Bratton | RoveGate, Watergate and Lessons for the White House >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: The War On Terror Destroys Our Civil Liberties (none / 0) (#1)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:29 PM EST
    I find the analysis spot on.

    well, living in NYC and taking the train at least ten times a week, I am ashamed to admit that in the absence of any major attempt to keep us subway riders safe, the bag checking makes me feel a TINY bit safer. I am sure it is mostly just for show, but maybe the checks will deter someone. Or maybe the cops will find something. I am against ethnic profiling, though. That IS stupid.Stop the guy in the puffy coat with the large bag with wires hangin out of it who looks nervous. Don't stop the brown guy with the newspaper or copy of the Koran in his hands. I'd prefer a working public address system, better staff training on safe emergency evacuations, but there's not much else that could be done, on the groung (or below it, I guess) to make us commuters a little more safe.

    Re: The War On Terror Destroys Our Civil Liberties (none / 0) (#3)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:29 PM EST
    Yes, but kdog, dontcha feel safer? LMFAO Hopeless is right. live free or die.

    Re: The War On Terror Destroys Our Civil Liberties (none / 0) (#4)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:29 PM EST
    If random searches of people in the subways are being done for anything except political effect, it’s nonsense.
    Yes, if they actually catch a terrorist by searching someone's briefcase or lunch-bucket it would be a universe expanding coinkydink; more than a miracle. It's New York, it's merely theater.

    Re: The War On Terror Destroys Our Civil Liberties (none / 0) (#5)
    by swingvote on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:29 PM EST
    While I don't think it's impossible that these "random" searches will actually catch anyone trying to carry a bomb onto a train (stranger things have happened), I'll agree that they are, for the most part, window dressing intended to make people feel safer. With that said, this kind of never ending carping about civil liberties does raise some questions: How should those responsible for stopping terrorist attacks from succeeding act to fulfill their obligations? What form of surveillance is constitutional? Would non-random searches (meaning you ride the subway, you get searched first) be acceptable? And yes, I know, the ACLU doesn't concern itself with anything so prosaic as offering real suggestions on how to protect us all; their only concern is our civil liberties, and as long as we have those, it doesn't matter if we're dead. But surely some of the great minds here can offer something more than complaints.

    This sort of almost-thinking would by hysterically funny if it weren't so d*mn sad. I bet that a British book-maker would give you odds on finding a terrorist in the tube during rush hour. And the likelihood of picking him out from the crowd would go up dramatically if we were allowed to racially profile. Which we all know but do not say. Sad, but, as my wife says, "until I'm in charge, the world will have to stumble along imperfectly." -C

    Re: The War On Terror Destroys Our Civil Liberties (none / 0) (#7)
    by jen on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:29 PM EST
    I bet that a British book-maker would give you odds on finding a terrorist in the tube during rush hour.
    So would the Brasilians.

    Re: The War On Terror Destroys Our Civil Liberties (none / 0) (#8)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:29 PM EST
    The tote bags are fab. While one is (not) being searched I can read from the other. JustP- the searches do not make people feel safer, they make people more afraid. And the ACLU may be the only one left to protect you when the FBI mistakes you (racial profile) for some crazy white supremacist who blew up a grade school. Oh since you, an upright citizen, gave up your rights so they could catch the big bad brown terrorists. You are not entitled to the old fashioned phone call, your wife is beside herself with grief and worry, and that obsolete pesky barrier that used to be called 'due process' has long been abandoned to make people like you feel safe. Hard to imagine, Well a bunch of white guys may have had a better imagination than you over two hundred years ago.

    Re: The War On Terror Destroys Our Civil Liberties (none / 0) (#9)
    by swingvote on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:29 PM EST
    Squeaky, I'll take that as a "no", as in, "No, I have nothing constructive to say and prefer to remain ignorant and afraid of my own government. The ACLU is right; I would rather be dead than have my tote bag searched before I get on the train." Fair enough, Squeaky prefers to be dead than to suffer a moment's inconvenience. I can respect that attitude, although it's a shame that such a position will get everyone else on the same train killed. Now, is there anyone here who can offer a constructive comment, or is this a naysayers only gathering?

    Re: The War On Terror Destroys Our Civil Liberties (none / 0) (#10)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:29 PM EST
    JustP- you obvioulsy have always been on top, hope it stays that way for you. Don't ever become weak and old because the birds will peck out your useless blind eyes as you are spit at some pathetic lefty offering you his hand.

    Well, jp asks one very good question:
    "How should those responsible for stopping terrorist attacks from succeeding act to fulfill their obligations?"
    Random searches conducted inside the subway stations won't do it. By the time a would-be bomber reaches the inspection point, he's already in the middle of a crowd. If he's stopped for a search, he detonates his bomb where he stands instead of after he's boarded the train. The possibility of search offers no deterrent. Searches of all passengers would create the same problem. Requiring all passengers to pass through a search creates a bottleneck which creates a crowd which becomes a target for a potential terrorist. Even if you are willing to accept a reduction of privacy rights to prevent terrorism, you've got to expect that giving up those rights buys you an increase in security. These random searches aren't likely to provide that sort of return.

    Re: The War On Terror Destroys Our Civil Liberties (none / 0) (#12)
    by swingvote on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:29 PM EST
    Squeaky, Why would some lefty spit in my eyes while offering me his hand? Are lefties, in your opinion, so out of it that they can't even decide whether to help the blind or hate them? Strange world you live in. Quaker, I agree, fully. So what do we do? Is there a method of dealing with the problem that does not constitute a violation of our basic liberties? Or are we just screwed, plain and simple? And thank you for understanding, unlike "he who is searching for grease" that I'm not saying that I agree with the idea of random searches.

    Re: The War On Terror Destroys Our Civil Liberties (none / 0) (#14)
    by The Heretik on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:31 PM EST
    Regarding: "never ending carping about civil liberties does raise some questions" "Carping" somehow suggests that defending civil liberties is almost unAmerican. Those who complain about "carping" forget the supreme law of the land. It is interesting that those who believe in right and wrong as absolutes so freguently view our civil rights as relative. If you want to go with that "Ends justifies the means" argument, why not go further and say that civil rights only apply when they are convenient? I am rather fond of the Fourth Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. One reason I am so fond of the Fourth Amendment is because I know the authority that must pause before breaking down doors will most likely break down less of the wrong doors. And search less of the wrong people. A free society pays a great cost when authority without a check is given a free hand. We are less free. Check our founding documents for why the Founders thought liberty so important. And finally, something needs to be said about this "ACLU should come up with solutions" McKrap of an attack. Let's think of the ACLU as a defense lawyer for the people who need it most. It is not the function of a defense lawyer to come up with "solutions," but to defend. Those who ask defenders to "solve" a problem must know that would take time and energy away from defense, thus weakening defense of liberty. It may seem odd to some, but law enforcement officials and agents work within a government of laws, not men. No less than the criminals they seek, law enforcement agents must respect the law, or no law truly exists. I do recommend reading the entire Hoffman cite to its end as it has much to say about where we are now: In the present atmosphere, the suggestion that there may be a disconcertingly large quotient of stumblebums, lazy bums and crooked bums handling our homeland security is treated as little short of sedition. That fact, coupled with the conviction that criticism of the war which is being waged but not won is unpatriotic, leaves us with but one course of action: to go on doing the same things.

    Re: The War On Terror Destroys Our Civil Liberties (none / 0) (#17)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:31 PM EST
    jpaul..I would argue an increased police presence is about equal to random searches in effectiveness. If the cop sees a guy in a sweater and trench coat in August, that would qualify as probable cause to investigate in my book. Other examples of probable cause would be being in a restricted area, any unusual bulges under clothing, or leaving a backpack or bag unattended. There isn't much probable cause to be had though, I'll give you that, but that's the risk of a free society. "Arab looking" is not enough, granted I'm biased here because I have arab features, but I'd feel the same if the majority of terrorists were Chinese and people were screaming to profile Asians. I would not look forward to waking up everyday to being searched and suspected for no other reason than appearance. I feel the BOR applies to me as much as the next guy with lighter pigment. The token clerks should be kept in place for no other reason than an extra set of eyes and ears, and for riders to report suspicious activity. Cell phone reception is inconsistent in the stations, the clerks have a land line to call 911. Is safety is so important, such a simple thing can and should be done. Bottom line for me jpaul, I have accepted the fact that it is practically impossible to prevent the lone madman from blowing something up in a free society. You could search everybody as they leave their home in the morning and you still could not prevent it. Part of the reason I can accept it is because it comes with glorious, unfettered freedom. Take away the freedom, and we are left unsafe and unfree, a lose lose situation.

    kdog -
    it comes with glorious, unfettered freedom. Take away the freedom, and we are left unsafe and unfree, a lose lose situation.
    I agree completely. "Personal" security, for me, derives from living each day in full awareness that death may tap on my shoulder in the next moment... As horrendous as that idea may be to some, it means living deliberately and fully concious each moment. It also means that my security does not depend on agencies apart from myself. I would rather have more life in my years than years in my life, thank you. Living in constant fear means you are dead already. No thanks!