whaddya know

New Terror Laws Used Vs. Common Criminals

Does this surprise anybody? I mean, are there really *thinking* people out there who did not see this coming?

It will only get worse.

There are of course those will say that this is "a small price to pay for protection from terrorists." For them, I have two words: Bill Clinton.

Clinton managed to prevent numerous terrorist attacks without these draconian measures. Of course, Clinton's advisors also communicated quite clearly to G. W. Bush's newly minted misAdministration what they knew about the threat that Osama bin Laden posed to the United States.

Following their oh-so-mature policy (remember the quote, "grownups are now in charge?") of "what Clinton did and said must have been wrong," the Bush misAdministration ignored the bin Laden warnings (and of course anything having to do with environmental protection - but that's another discussion). The result? The World Trade Center buildings and the Pentagon were struck by airliners. The WTC buildings collapsed; people died in the Pentagon, but it of course is not tall enough to collapse entirely.

Now we have John "Damn the Bill of Rights, full speed ahead!" Ashcroft working as hard as he can to dismantle the basic rights we have enjoyed for some 213 years (since Rhode Island ratified the Constitution of the United States in 1790).

His argument is that it will help prevent another incident like the tragedy of September 11, 2001. In reality, nothing within the so-called "PATRIOT" Act (an acronym - adopted to make it palatable to the Congress and the American public) would have prevented the September 11, 2001 horror.