August 20, 2003
Attack of the Narco-Terrorists!
I believe that somewhere, deep in the bowels of Washington’s many administrative buildings, there is a civil servant whose entire job description is “sit at desk and make up patriotic, stirring acronyms for bills”.
Fresh from the stunning success of the USA PATRIOT act, that servant has outdone themselves with their next effort. Please welcome the VICTORY ACT - the Vital Interdiction of Criminal Terrorist Organizations Act of 2003.
(That doesn’t even spell VICTORY. Never mind.)
The draft bill, dated to be introduced in the first session of the next Congress by Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) – the same, eminently sensible senator who proposed remotely destroying the computers of copyright violators – is this: apparently the administration has had enough of a separate War on Drugs and War on Terror, and now wants to combine the two.
A Democratic aide for the House Judiciary Committee told ABC News that:
“This bill would treat drug possession as a ‘terrorist offense’ and drug dealers as ‘narco-terrorist kingpins.’”Remember - always dehumanise those you want to attack. They’re not college students experimenting, they’re terrorists! He’s not buying some marijuana for his mother with MS, he’s a terrorist! And so is she!
That’s not all, folks. Remember those “sneak-and-peek” secret subpoenas that were only for terrorists? Well, the VICTORY act extends them to drug dealers. Who’s next? Suspected murderers? Tax evaders? According to the ACLU’s Jameel Jaffer,
“Absolutely nothing would prevent the attorney general from using these subpoenas to obtain the records of people who have no connection to terrorism, drug trafficking or crime of any sort.”
Ah, but why should you worry? If you haven’t broken the law, what have you got to fear?
Posted by Thomas Scott at August 20, 2003 03:56 PMCan we just dispense with the niceties and procedural hoi poloi and turn into what we will eventually be? Bolshevik Russia / Nazi Germany.
What many people don’t realize is that the surface philosophy (kill Jews, kill non-communists) is simply a SYMPTOM of the disease we now have. Doesn’t anyone read history anymore? Inch by inch we are walking down the stair-case into a dark void where humanity, life and death are inconsequential. It starts with the opposition, the terrorists, the Jews, the Troskyites, but soon it’s at your own doorstep.
And sadly, I am beginning to feel the disease infecting me. I am starting to not care at all, because what use is it to save a fool intent on suicide?
Posted by: Stephen VanDyke at August 20, 2003 06:02 PMStephen: don’t blow a gasket just yet - as I pointed out in the article, right now, it’s only a draft. Like PATRIOT 2 (or as I prefer, “Patriot 2: Ashcroft Strikes Back”), the odds of it getting through are, mercifully, not too good.
Of course, if there’s another 9/11, or someone manages to get a dirty bomb into DC, or a regular bomb goes off on the Golden Gate Bridge, or any number of other nightmare scenarios play out, all bets are off.
Posted by: Thomas Scott at August 20, 2003 06:24 PMHow we leap from tracking terrorists to gassing Jews… I’ll never know.
Posted by: CJ at August 20, 2003 06:43 PMUpdate: Dean’s been awfully quick in starting a petition against Ashcroft; it’s been going for a bit, apparently, with 41,000 signatures so far.
Mainstream news? Not a thing. So much for that ‘liberal media’ idea. Maybe they’ll pick it up in a few days.
Posted by: Thomas Scott at August 20, 2003 06:45 PMStephen, I believe that is a misuse of “hoi polloi.” Your apologies to the written language.
ciaran
Posted by: ciaran at August 20, 2003 08:38 PMWell I think that Mr Ashcroft is an egomaniacal wierdo and an a-hole. He is doing the things that Clinton could never get away with (but Janet Reno wanted to). I was greatly concerned with the laws passed by Clinton and Di-Fi on gun control and the assault on the Waco (whacko) compound where the ATF assaulted a compound full of innocent people on false charges. What is to happen when a leftist gets into office and uses these laws in thier favor? Ashcroft is a dangerous man and so are his advisors. There will be a correction in there somewhere. Hopefully some of the those on the right will bring this man, and his policies down.
Posted by: pete at August 21, 2003 02:47 AMMark the calendar. Today is the day I totally agree with Pete.
“Ashcroft is a dangerous man and so are his advisors. “
Definitely, Pete. And I think it is a good time to point out that when many lefties, at least this one, call for the end of the Bush administration in the 2004 elections, it isn’t just the Liar, but his henchmen that are the problem.
We need a good house-cleaning.
CJ, it does seem tough to go from terrorists to killing Jews, but you missed the point. The VICTORY draft will make some pretty begnin law-breakers fall into the terror category. That’s the analogy.
And, BTW, if you don’t see the slope these “leaders” have us on, which is Christianity or nothing, you are missing the point of this administration.
Have you been following the Ten Commandments debacle? It is just horrible who religious zealots are trying to take over the US.
This is a country for all religions, favoring none. We must keep it that way.
Part of what Ashcroft is doing is setting up a trap for anyone who doesn’t lead his view of a conservative Chrisitian life.
Scary.
Robbie
Posted by: Robbie D at August 21, 2003 09:57 AMI don’t think that religion has anything to do with it. I am referring to the brutally obvious civil rights violations. I also do not think that Bush is a liar. It is a stretch to connect the ten commandments debacle to Bush or Ashcroft. It is a state matter and should be handled at the state level. I would like to hear some more conservative views on this though. Robbie, I am not a big fan of the Bush administration, but let me meake this clear…
Constantly calling him a liar is not going to prove any points. I am not a big fan because I don’t see a lot of his policies as being truly conservative. I do think that he is a man of character (although you just think he is a character) and I like a lot of the things he has done. If someone could prove he is a liar, he would have been impeached already. John Ashcroft is another matter. The Patriot act is another matter as well. Why hasn’t Congress acted on this?
Pete,
I fear that with Ashcroft, religion has *everything* to do with it. Look into the kind of man he is.
Zealot comes to mind.
Rob
Posted by: Robbie D at August 21, 2003 04:39 PMRobbie, please email me so we can discuss something. I need to talk to you about something but you have no valid email address. mine is listed. it is pete@themadgeek.com…anyway email me when you get a chance.
Posted by: pete at August 22, 2003 01:12 AMThe awol chimp envoked a crusade, an historical reference that the Islamic world always loves to have refrences to. This holy mission, seems to have brought him closer to complete godhead status, and I cant help but think he will declare a direct connection (via phone, fax or tinfoil on cranium)to his god.
Ashcroft is a lesser minion that is intent on spreading this crusade to all levels of society by dubbing everyone that smokes pot a terrorist. (When will they wake up and decriminalize and tax it?) -does that sound too liberal? Sorry!
I know alot of people in Missouri that were glad to see him out of the state, and most of them are repulicans.
I just hope he spent his own money to cover the nude statues for his press conference. Nakedness is bad! I shall not be tempted.
Sorry for the rant.
Posted by: Solarwind at August 22, 2003 09:42 AM“awol chimp”? Nice job of making yourself sound bitter and nasty. Rhetoric like this is just boring and played out.(like Led Zeppelin)
Posted by: Pete at August 22, 2003 12:42 PMPete,
I am bitter, and I have to say what I think and feel. It may seem too partisan for you, but some dont like the way things have turned out the past few years, and where we are going.
Dont much care for LZ. Never did.
Posted by: Solarwind at August 22, 2003 01:10 PM“AWOL Chimp” — not bad… will become an issue once the “flight suit” commercials come out. Beautiful thing is, so many groups are forming against Bush, it won’t be up to the Dems alone to fight the travesty of this administration.
Robbie
Posted by: Robbie D at August 22, 2003 01:31 PMSinking….lower….lower…lower..lower….*poof*
No more reasoned discussion here.
to quote Thomas’s article
“Remember - always dehumanise those you want to attack.”
Actually, Pete, even though we partisans like to couch things in funny terms, what we have “lowered” to is actually the crux of the matter.
Among those who share the passion to vote Bush out, the AWOL issue, Ashcroft, Rummy, Iraq… it is all part of the big underlying current of mistrust and fear of what these men will do next.
While our discourse may not seem high-brow, it keeps re-tapping into the visceral hate for the ways of this administration.
Some of the right wingers like to say this is just more “whining of the left,” and to them I say, surprise! This isn’t like anything you have seen from the left in a long time, if ever. This is the early, early stages of people rising to the call of saving our country.
If you believe in GWB, than be clear, it is a call to save our country from you. If you do not believe in GWB, then it is a call to you to get onboard and get some new men in Washington in 2004 — assuming we have a fair election.
Robbie D.
Posted by: Robbie D at August 22, 2003 04:48 PMRobbie, I have asked you to email me, You haven’t …why not?
Posted by: pete at August 23, 2003 01:55 AM>If someone could prove he is a liar, he would have been impeached already.
LOL! Lying isn’t a crime unless it’s under oath and relevant to the case.
More importantly, impeachment is a political process. If Dubya were to rape and murder a 15-year-old boy on national television, and say in a subsequent press conference that although he did it, it was someone else’s fault, the House still wouldn’t vote to impeach. Both impeachments started with a majority in the House that was politically hostile to the president.
Posted by: Dan Wylie-Sears at August 24, 2003 12:46 PMMy opinion of Bush and Ashcroft’s “patriot act” is that we should have gotten some real patriots instead, or at the very least some better actors. As for the “victory act”, it was a bit premature, and the stuffing in the crotch of his flight suit was ridiculous.
Posted by: Dan Wylie-Sears at August 24, 2003 12:48 PMAshcrofts’ missionary zeal is completely separate from Bush. Bush is supporting him, quite clearly, but I can tell you as a Missourian that Ashcroft has been striving to create a theocratic police state for decades now. Why do you think that the largely Republican state of Missouri elected a DEAD Democrat instead of Ashcroft?
Posted by: rev_matt at August 25, 2003 03:44 PM
