Talk:Treating dissent as treason
Today's "Wayback Machine": http://www.archive.org/web/web.php
The premise for Treating dissent as treason is the same as for enemies of freedom and all the rest of the phraseology that goes with it ... "for us or against us", etc. There are numerous related articles and resources on this posted on my TALK page. Darn! These guys have nothing new to say, do they?
12/9/03 12:45 (EST) AI
In response to/support of "When In Doubt, Attack People's Patriotism":
- Justice defends Ashcroft's congressional testimony, CNN, December 7, 2001. Justice Department parses for Ashcroft. Response to Ashcroft Defends Antiterror Plan and Says Criticism May Aid Foes, New York Times, December 7, 2001, etc.
- Right, Center, & Left Support Free & Open Debate in Wartime: Dissent Does Not Give Aid, Comfort to Enemy, Remarks delivered by Roger Pilon, vice president for legal affairs and director, Center for Constitutional Studies, Cato Institute, December 10, 2001.
- Organize to Bring Back the Bill of Rights, MotherJones, December 12, 2001: "The chief value of Attorney General John Ashcroft's anticlimactic appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Dec. 6, was his naked public contempt for the First Amendment right to dissent, coming as it did after Ashcroft had repeatedly promised that the domestic campaign against terrorism would not threaten Constitutional rights."
- Ashcroft's Fundamental Flaw by Zak Mann, December 15, 2001: "And lastly, John Ashcroft says that those who criticize him 'only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity,' but the Constitution does NOT say, 'freedom of speech' and 'freedom of the press' are 'only acceptable if the ideas espoused are popular and do not erode national unity.'"
12/9/03 AI (more to come!)
- Also, found this info in a Buzzflash forum .... needs checking into, as well:
- "Administration flacks selectively use parallels from the WWII era to justify actions and attack dissent. The fittest parallel is probably Mussolini's attack on Ethiopia."
- A search on the phrase "avoid confronting evil" led in two directions: DeLay's quote being cited and Christian tenets warning not to "avoid confronting evil" ... which is a quite interesting turn on the phrase.
But, let's look at all the quotes in this article to find some specifics (who, how, where, when, why). All I see is finger pointing ... "you, you, you ... they, they, they." ... and it'll get worse, unfortunately, because the tactic works.
- "Your tactics ... they erode ... They give .."
- "These are people ... They will do ..."
- "... in harm's way."
- ".... critics .... are encouraging terrorists and complicating"
- ".. Democratic-led 'Senate is not interested ...'"
- "... does a disservice ... suggest ... exact inappropriate thing to do."
And my fave: "You said .. your comment ... you dislike this country and its policies."
