|
October 18, 2007
One of the reasons I'm wary of the return of the Coalition is my fear that it would set a low threshold for the executive branch to commence monitoring citizens. By that I mean eavesdropping on citizens with few oversight or restrictions of any kind. Is this a realistic fear? I don't know.
But I'm wary of the national security state and the way it has defined small roving bands of stateless and army-less Islamic Terrorists as having changed the world forever.
They also provide the greatest threat to national security and to everything we held dear.
Why, they are even worse than the Communists of yesteryear who used to hide under our beds and were bent on world domination. They used to be the real bad guys, but not any more.
Conservatism is not just successful but also fashionable. The modern "conservative" movement, if it retains its ascendency, would push for the lessening of restrictions on the executive's power to eavesdrop on our international calls and the removal of protections when the Commonwealth Government monitor's our communications.
The conservative's line of reasoning is that Islamofascist Terrorists are so cunning, and so fanatical--- so evil-- that we must change the very nature of our country. Constitutional and other restrictions on government power are obsolete in the war on terrorism. They hold that since the early days of the War on Terror, the Labor Party has undermined national security by siding with civil-liberties extremists on questions of intelligence collection from Australian citizens. These civil-liberties extremists--- leftists who think the American government is more dangerous than radical Islam--promise to revolt if surveillance restrictions are eased.
|
Gary, Naomi Klein discusses the exponential growth in eaves-dropping and monitoring technologies as a result of the shock of Sept 11.