Refuse and Resist! Police State USA

[Cd.]

By C. Clark Kissinger

We see the contour of a new global strategy in the [Bush] Security Strategy document of last September and its actions.

First is a commitment to make perminant the US military and economic superiority over any potential rival to US dominance of the world. Henceforth, no rival power will be allowed to gain the ability to challenge the United States.

Second is the first-strike or preemptive use of military force, including the first use of nuclear weapons, to enforce its new world order.

Third, faced with shakey and unreliable neo-colonial regimes in the Third World, the US has moved towards global military action and direct, long term military occupation to bring stability and "civilizing norms" to the so-called "failed states."

Fourth is the breaking out of constraints of international law and treaty institutions.

The assult on Iraq is not an end, but rather a beginning. But it is also a step that could unleash forces that could get beyond their control.

In terms of the domestic impact of all this, it is important to underscore that this striking out for global power cannot be accomplished without shredding the historical social compact in this country and radically tearing up the basic principals of law and civil liberties.

We have seen the mass registrations and deportations of immigrants from Muslim countries, the holding of US citizens by the military and denying the jurisdiction of the civil courts, the institution of massive surveilence, the domestic deployment of the military, the SEVIS program compelling colleges and universities to report on all foreign students, and now we have the Justice Department's new draft Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003. This legislation would even empower the government to strip anyone of citizenship.

Together with this has been an exponential growth of data processing and information sharing between police agencies at the local, state, and federal levels. The USA Patriot act breaks down the old walls between domestic and foreign intelligence, between law enforcement and political suppression. Everything from our email trafic, to our videotaped images in daily life, to our secret grand jury testimony is now available to local cops and the CIA alike.

Two things should now be clear.

First, the massive attacks on civil liberties and the right to dissent in this country is situated in, and flows from, the US grab for global power - Bush's War on the World.

Second, we have to say the architecture and mechinisms of a wartime police state are being put in place. The norms of society are being radically changed, and the attacks on immigrants are the door through which this all is being introduced.

This specter of war and repression is why the Not In Our Name Statement of Consciendce has from the beginning treated the global power grab in the new domestic order as a single juggernaut.

I stopped this article here because it continues for several pages. But I hope you get the jist of it.

From the Revolutionary Worker

[Bochephus]

Originally posted by Criminal
By C. Clark Kissinger

We see the contour of a new global strategy in the [Bush] Security Strategy document of last September and its actions.

First is a commitment to make perminant the US military and economic superiority over any potential rival to US dominance of the world. Henceforth, no rival power will be allowed to gain the ability to challenge the United States.

Makes perfect sense to me, why would we want to let another EVIL empire threaten our existence?

[quote]Second is the first-strike or preemptive use of military force, including the first use of nuclear weapons, to enforce its new world order. {/QUOTE]

The US did not strike first in Iraq, Iraq started the war by invading Kuwait, then NOT obeying the terms of a PEACE AGREEMENT which it ASKED for. When that happens, the fighting resumes.

Third, faced with shakey and unreliable neo-colonial regimes in the Third World, the US has moved towards global military action and direct, long term military occupation to bring stability and "civilizing norms" to the so-called "failed states."

Too bad the author hasn't provided any examples. I disagree with his premise.

Fourth is the breaking out of constraints of international law and treaty institutions.

It seems to me the US led COALITION enforced the Surrender Agreement agreed to by Iraq, something the UN failed to do. We may have given the UN a "heads up" in a last effort to save itself.

The assult on Iraq is not an end, but rather a beginning. But it is also a step that could unleash forces that could get beyond their control.

It may be a beginning, one that will put evil people on notice that the civilized world will no longer tolerate wholesale butchery and threats to our existence.

In terms of the domestic impact of all this, it is important to underscore that this striking out for global power cannot be accomplished without shredding the historical social compact in this country and radically tearing up the basic principals of law and civil liberties.

Caution is called for to make sure that doesn't happen

We have seen the mass registrations and deportations of immigrants from Muslim countries, the holding of US citizens by the military and denying the jurisdiction of the civil courts, the institution of massive surveilence, the domestic deployment of the military, the SEVIS program compelling colleges and universities to report on all foreign students, and now we have the Justice Department's new draft Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003. This legislation would even empower the government to strip anyone of citizenship.

Together with this has been an exponential growth of data processing and information sharing between police agencies at the local, state, and federal levels. The USA Patriot act breaks down the old walls between domestic and foreign intelligence, between law enforcement and political suppression. Everything from our email trafic, to our videotaped images in daily life, to our secret grand jury testimony is now available to local cops and the CIA alike.

The author flat out lies here as there as been no mass deportations of Muslims. Nothing wrong with asking schools or anyone else to help protect its citizens

Two things should now be clear.

First, the massive attacks on civil liberties and the right to dissent in this country is situated in, and flows from, the US grab for global power - Bush's War on the World.

Second, we have to say the architecture and mechinisms of a wartime police state are being put in place. The norms of society are being radically changed, and the attacks on immigrants are the door through which this all is being introduced.

This specter of war and repression is why the Not In Our Name Statement of Consciendce has from the beginning treated the global power grab in the new domestic order as a single juggernaut.

I stopped this article here because it continues for several pages. But I hope you get the jist of it.

From the Revolutionary Worker

Well thank you for not continueing this drivel. If you had labelled this as a product of communism I could have skipped reading it. The author appears to be correct about one thing, Bush seems to be a threat to evil, the reds are right to be concerned.

[soylentgreen]

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
First is a commitment to make perminant the US military and economic superiority over any potential rival to US dominance of the world. Henceforth, no rival power will be allowed to gain the ability to challenge the United States.

This is nothing new. It's been US policy since at least the end of the Cold War. Also, any other nation in our position would do exactly the same thing.

Any country in our position would do the same.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
Second is the first-strike or preemptive use of military force, including the first use of nuclear weapons, to enforce its new world order.

I don't know another way to fight terrorism. Honestly, I don't. Perhaps the Osamas of the world should have thought about America's reaction to Sept. 11 before they engaged us.

The fact is the jihad has been on for decades. America only realized it 18 months ago. And now, we're going to fight it the only way we know how.

The only way to end the jihad is by the destruction of America or by the destruction of America's enemies. I prefer the latter.

These people can not be appeased, they can't be reasoned with. Even if they could, that would be a dangerous course. We'd be signaling that all that needs to be done to get a seat at the bargaining table with the US is to kill a few hundred or thousand Americans. That is a very dangerous message to send...and it will only encourage more terrorism and the demands that America meet the consessions of crazies in order to stop the killing...and it will never end. The demands of terrorists will just become more and more ridiculous.

The time to draw the line is now.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
Third, faced with shakey and unreliable neo-colonial regimes in the Third World, the US has moved towards global military action and direct, long term military occupation to bring stability and "civilizing norms" to the so-called "failed states."

Again, hardly new. This wasn't invented by GWB nor America. It has been going on as far as recorded history. Does that make it right? Perhaps not. But, that is the way it is.

US garrisons occupy dozens of countries around the world. The Soviet Union did the same thing. Again, any country in our position would do the same.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
Fourth is the breaking out of constraints of international law and treaty institutions.

Such as?

Even if the US is doing those things, so what? That's the reality of international politics...it always has been...it always will be. Countries do what they can get away with. If no one can stop them or wants to stop them, then "oh, well".

Look, America is by far not the only country to do this.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
The assult on Iraq is not an end, but rather a beginning.

Oh, poor helpless innocent Iraq. My heart bleeds...

We all know that Saddam could have avoided this conflict and walked away with suitcases of cash (probably even American dollars). Instead, he chose death.

Unfortunately, I don't think this is the end. If we stop now, we'd be foolish. We must do what we must do.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
But it is also a step that could unleash forces that could get beyond their control.

It is already beyond our control. As I said, the jihad has been waging for decades. We're trying to get things under control. If we can do that by diplomacy, we will. If we can't, then woe be to those who support terrorism within their own borders.

As I said on Sept 12, America will vanquish and crush her enemies.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
In terms of the domestic impact of all this, it is important to underscore that this striking out for global power cannot be accomplished without shredding the historical social compact in this country and radically tearing up the basic principals of law and civil liberties.

As if that concerns Leftists anyway... No, each political faction within our country seems to have a different idea of what "civil liberties" mean. For example, Lefties make laws to keep people from exercising their First Amendment right to peacable assmebly...if that activity is done in front of an abortion clinic. Lefties also don't seem to like the civil liberties plainly expressed in the Second Amendment.

Again, this has nothing to do with Bush. The way I see it, Republicans and Democrats both continually curtail our rights one after another. It's not new.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
We have seen the mass registrations and deportations of immigrants from Muslim countries

So? It doesn't bother me.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
the holding of US citizens by the military and denying the jurisdiction of the civil courts

You mean Johnny Taliban? Sorry, not much sympathy here.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
the institution of massive surveilence, the domestic deployment of the military

Can't say I like either of those.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
the SEVIS program compelling colleges and universities to report on all foreign students,

Boo, hoo!! Look, if you're here on a student visa, you should be expected to go to school. If you don't, then go back where you came from. There has to be a way to keep track of these people.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
and now we have the Justice Department's new draft Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003. This legislation would even empower the government to strip anyone of citizenship.

Anyone? Or just naturalized citizens? The truth is, that many naturalized citizens are later found out to have lied on their applications for citizenship...but the INS is barred from removing their citizenship that was gained under false pretenses. I think the government should have the power to correct those mistakes. Sorry.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
The USA Patriot act breaks down the old walls between domestic and foreign intelligence, between law enforcement and political suppression. Everything from our email trafic, to our videotaped images in daily life, to our secret grand jury testimony is now available to local cops and the CIA alike.

Can't say I like the Patriot Act. I think it's unconstitutional. But, once again, it wasn't only GWB's doing...it passed the Congress with Democratic support.

Originally written by C. Clark Kissinger
First, the massive attacks on civil liberties and the right to dissent in this country is situated in, and flows from, the US grab for global power - Bush's War on the World.

I think this is a fictitious senario for the time being. I see lots of people protesting in the streets (even blocking the roads) and nothing has happened to them at all. Hardly the crackdown Kissinger envisions...in fact I would say the protesters were given more liberty than they should be entitled to.

[Snouter]

Excellent points Bochephus and soylentgreen. Criminal, the Revolutionary Worker website has a lot of crazy articles. After reading a few articles which are quite redundent, it is clear that the Marxists are angry over the liberation of people more than anything else.

[Monster]

You know, the more I read, hear, and see of Bush's plans, the more I am reminded of the character Leto Atreides II from the "Dune" series. Sans perceptive abilities. He is basically doing the same things as Leto II, but without realizing it. He is creating an empire that will collapse, and when it does it will take the whole world with it.

Only major difference is that in the books, Leto II did it consciously and intentionally, while Bush is blindly following a path.

[soylentgreen]

Originally posted by Stage Monster He is creating an empire that will collapse

Once again, the empire has existed for decades...if not longer. Bush isn't doing anything new. Can't you people understand that?!?!!

I don't agree with American Empire, but I'm not delusional enough to think that it just started after the 2000 election.

Originally posted by Stage Monster and when it does it will take the whole world with it.

All empires eventually fall. I hope and pray that America's preeminence doesn't end in my lifetime. I know that whatever country replaces us will not be nearly as benevolent.

As I've said before...when America's day is over, all those who screamed and complained about it may wish for it to return...

[Monster]

No, it didn't start after the 2k election, it just got much worse at a much faster rate of decline than before.

[Brian]

I think your confusing 2000 with 1992....

[Cd.]

Originally posted by Snouter
Excellent points Bochephus and soylentgreen. Criminal, the Revolutionary Worker website has a lot of crazy articles. After reading a few articles which are quite redundent, it is clear that the Marxists are angry over the liberation of people more than anything else.

I do take much of what they say with a grain of salt but I also think we should focus more on the content rather than who wrote this or where it was published. I find a long of valid points in this. I did not continue it because (being honest here) I was tired of typing out the article and it was very very long.

[Bochephus]

Originally posted by Criminal

I do take much of what they say with a grain of salt but I also think we should focus more on the content rather than who wrote this or where it was published. I find a long of valid points in this. I did not continue it because (being honest here) I was tired of typing out the article and it was very very long.

I don't care who wrote it I found no valid points. But since you found so many please enlighten us, but stick to what you typed.

[soylentgreen]

I never heard of the guy or the "Revolutionary Worker". I just commented on what was written.