I know that strictly speaking, this isn't y2k related, but i know that many of you here try to keep informed about civil liberties, and this is directly related to that. I have been reading a book titled Drug Warriors & Their Prey, from police power to police state, by Richard Lawrence Miller. It has been a fascinating read, and i highly recommend it. If you think how many of our civil liberties have been slowly eroded in the last 20 years or so, that are directly related to our so-called 'War on Drugs", than it behooves all interested to become more informed on the subject. Without going into depth, i will put in an excerpt that i think is particularly pertinant to us: "Loss Of Legal Rights" Attacks on civil liberties are basic if ordinary people are to be destroyed. Attacks have 2 premises. First, civil liberties interfere with the destruction effort and must be eliminated. Second, civil liberties are inherently undesirable because they give citizens power to affect government actions. For Nazis the second premise was the more important one. But they publicized the first premise to generate public support for repeal of civilliberties. Rhetoric inflamed the public about alleged danger from Jews so that fear would overcome normal scruples. Actions that are otherwise intoleralbe can becom popular when portrayed as emergency war measures. German leaders used the war on jews as a smoke screen to generate public support for actions that eventually put all citizens at the mercy ofa totalitarian regime. American drug warriors use a 2 track approach to weaken civil liberties. one track exempts drug users from civil liberties protecting other citizens. An additional track expands the definition of drug user. That expansion occurs in 2 directions. One direction lengthens the list of illegal drugs, so last year's legal conduct becomes illegal this year. The second used new technology to improve detection of drug use. Such technology can increase the pool of victims even if marijuana use declines in the general population. By stripping civil liberties from more and more citizens, government officials gain more and more power to act on any subject without regard to citizen's desires. That gain in power is not coincidental to the drug war. The gain is intended by top drug warriors. As with german leaders in the war on jews, american leaders in the war on drug users find civil liberties inherently undesirable. Unfortunately, too many citizens agree. Many find authoritarianism comforting, liberating them from the stress of making personal decisions about right and wrong. To be righteous, all a person has to do is follow orders. Dictatorships typically enjoy huge popular support. In evaluating drug warrior attacks on civil liberties, we should first pause to remember why the bill of rights exists. It exists because american colonists were so outraged by British police conduct that they overthrew the government. The revolution was a shoot-out with the police. Patriots did not risk their property and their lives for misty ideals. Patriots acted to save themselves from destruction by their own government. There is a reason why patriots of th 1700's prized civil liberties so highly. That reason is illustrated by what happened in germany when the nazi government repealed civil liberties.A REGIME THAT WISHES TO ELIMINATE GUARANTEES PROTECTING PROPERTY AND LIVES IS A REGIME THAT IS UP TO NO GOOD. IF A REGIME MUST ATTACK CITIZENS PROPERTY AND LIVES TO ACHIEVE ITS GOALS, THE REGIME MERITS REPLACEMENT. CIVIL LIBERTIES ARE A TRIP WIRE ALARM AGAINST EVIL. Evil can appear suddenly, as when Nazis started their regime with wholesale repeal of civil liberties. Or evil can appear so gradually that is seems as normal as smog. Loss of american civil liberties in the name of drugs has been so incremental that some persons can scarcely believe how far drug warriors have moved us toward a totalitarian regime, with assent from judges 'so enamored of jurisprudence that they did not even notice that a travesty of justice was being put over.' sorry for the length, but i wanted to share something that i think is important for all of us to think about as americans.

-- Damian Solorzano (oggy1@webtv.net), March 05, 1999

Answers

Flower...oh!..no!Even philosophy may be addicting!Ever ben -ah mud baby? Aahhaavvvee!....not bad! Look tis not what you see! Know no more! No less than than war will awake em -huh? From dirt cometh heart,and dang it, the Heart is 'still' the lite or " MORE PROPERLY"the begin of the begeen! {excuse or not my speeeel,eennn ahhmmm readdyy fer yore funk! "As in I doon't knoow!!!! Try me on! Dirt...are...unt..wader1...yes..am..looken fer ya!....Spunky!!!???????????Ya,Ya ya...you belong in jail! Find!!!!!WHAT?>>>>>>>>>&+@$??.....Leave IT!..........=======0

-- John Kavaney (godsgold@hotmail.com), March 05, 1999.

The only thing that scares me more than the power of the government is the power of the religious right. I was reading William J. Fielding's "Shackles of the Supernatural," last night and much of what has happened to the Jews, throughout history, has been sanctioned by the other religiions

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), March 05, 1999.

YES John, It WILL wear off! Just try to relax.................................."And so a lot of people say threre's too much personal freedom. When personal freedom's being abused, you have to move to limit it. That's what we did in the announcement I made last weekend on the public housing projects, about how we're going to have weapon sweeps and more things like that to try to make people safer in their communities" "Bill Clinton-3-22-94-MTV's "Enough is Enough"

-- KoFE (Sameplace@same.time), March 05, 1999.

I think we're open-minded enough to look for the big picture. ........................................................... .---- 204.107.208.2/~ralph/china.jfk.israel.html and www.nypost.com/news/4016.htm ----and www.louisbeam.com/fbilinked.htm

-- KofE (Connect@the.dots), March 05, 1999.

gilda,

Once again, it is clear that you cannot put two sentences together without contradicting yourself. In your first statement you express the same sort of venom toward the "religious right" that you condemn in the second statement. Can you say "Hypocrisy?"

-- Elbow Grease (Elbow_Grease@AutoShop.com), March 05, 1999.

gilda, excuse me for pointing this out, but much of what has happened to the jews in the last century can be blamed on Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin, neither of whom was in the least religious. I think the Author of that book you're reading needs his butt kicked for spreading disinformation, and you need to wake up and smell the roses.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), March 05, 1999.

Damian--great post, and v. true. I've felt the drug 'war,' (a war which is never won, and always mandates more money and more prisons) filled a vaccuum left after the Soviet bogey-man ceased to be a real threat the National Security State could use to scare the populace into sacrificing liberty. Gilda: I'm more afraid of the religious left, by which I mean true-believers in statism and social engineering. Governments have killed far, far more people than any 'fundie' desperados. Was Mao a right-wing religious? Hitler? Stalin? Pol Pot? They were all statists, who believed the needs of the individual where subservient to the needs of the state. A guy like Bill Clinton is far more dangerous than a Jerry Falwell, and the ATF/DEA/ETC guys are a lot more willing to pump you full of lead than the 'moral majority.' Remember: when the ADL sends you that stuff, they want you to send them money. They, too, are fear-mongers.

-- Spidey (in@jam.com), March 05, 1999.

Boy have you impressed me. You want to kick the butt of an author with whom you are totally unfamiliar, and who is dead. Gee I wish I were as brilliant as you and could understand a book without reading it. In no way did I imply, that either Stalin or Hitler were religious, but it didn't keep them from using religion to back their personal agendas.

It seems to me that many on this forum are just panting to call anyone that comes on here and disagrees, a troll, or some other tacky name. And once they mention the sacred religious right, or that they simply don't understand your y2k panic, or that they are a DGI, they are drowned in venmon.

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), March 05, 1999.

gilda, in what way did Hitler and Stalin use religion to back their agenda's? Hitler was an occultist and Stalin was an atheist. You really need to read less of that new world order propoganda and study history a little more. I can't even imagine how far to the left you are if you think the mainstream media is Conservative.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), March 05, 1999.

Yes, Gilda, be suspicious of everyone. Few months ago, DEA guys burst into an apartment, machine-gunned a young woman (kids screaming in background). Later turns out - oops, never mind - wrong apartment.

-- Blue Himalayan (bh@k2.y), March 05, 1999.

"...in what way did Hitler and Stalin use religion to back their agenda's?"

Nikoli,

When I read your post I was reminded of a remark my history prof made when I was going to school. He served in WWII, and, when the subject came up in the course of studies, he told this little story:

It seems that the British troops had an interesting attitude about the slogan (for want of a better term) that was cast on the typical German soldier's belt buckle, which was (pardon my attempt at reproduction...I do not speak, nor have I ever studied German), "Gott Mitt Un," which, freely translated, says, "God is with us."

The British troops' reply to this was, "So what? We got mittens, too."

Thought you might enjoy that.

LP

-- LP (soldog@hotmail.com), March 06, 1999.