Finally understanding the constitutional harm
I have had a difficult time understanding the rationale for opposing the laws passed in the wake of 9/11 aimed at taking terrorists out of business. That I have applauded, the proactive stance that President Bush has taken, is without doubt based on the knowledge that Presidents Clinton and H.W. Bush took insignificant actions to cut the head off of the terrorist snakes, who attacked the United States and our allies with impunity.
This morning while reading Eric Mink’s analysis of the actions taken by the FBI in the use of National Security Letters, I had a “Eureka” moment, finally grasping and internalizing the potential and real harm that the gross misuse of this NSL process has caused to my Constitutional right to privacy and freedom.
Mr. Mink’s column needs to be reprinted Sunday on page A-1, to ensure that it gets the broadest possible circulation. The analysis presented by Mr. Mink, does for the first time, clearly define and demonstrate the impact of a seemingly good tool, when misused and overused while shrouded in the cloak of national security.
Mr. Mink’s analysis should be submitted to the Pulitzer committee, for demonstrating not only clarity, but hitting me between the eyes, driving some sense in my lethargic brain.
Stuart Katz
Chesterfield
(2 votes, average: 1 out of 5)
Loading ...
Garrison:
“So, just w(h)ere do you draw the line on privacy. Or is there even such a thing as privacy other than gun ownership?”
Of course there is. The Griswold V. Connecticut that I previously referenced was a good decision. What is bad is so many loopy justices have expanded it beyond the bounds of reason.