So Long ,Rights of Individuals

Perhaps I'm going to annoy plenty of people here -- perhaps I have already ;-) -- but these type of suppositions seem to hold an underlying assumption that given the situation the current US executive branch is now about to unleash a long-cherished plan of barcoding our DNA, putting balls and chains on all our limbs, and replace all our brains with pudding. Call me suspicious, but that's reading too much into things.

That said, Mike actually raises a good point in that where does understandable reaction to a horrible thing become potentially abusive? It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in the near future, but two things should be kept in mind:

1) WWII and the concurrent internment of Japanese-Americans having happened and now having been seen as a fuck-up, the US government is not planning on doing that again. Thus the rhetoric is clearly focused on individuals now -- though of course people can be extremely clever regarding what individuals and what they're supposed to have done.

2) Related to that, if -- and it's a potentially big if, but I think it's the case -- the gov't is trying to persuade as much of the Muslim world as possible to join in their little shindig, it is not in its best interest to willy-nilly start throwing out tons of people left and right on the basis of their background/religious belief.

That said, there's clearly the potential for abuse or worse, and Ashcroft isn't exactly my hero either. Nonetheless, the wider political goals will for now keep him in line (and indeed, as time goes on it's interesting to see how carefully the government is toeing that line -- as was noted via the BBC, I think, the most open war-footing freak in the executive branch, Wolfowitz or whatever his name is, is very clearly *not* getting his way, otherwise Iraq would be in flames by now). It's what happens over time that should be watched closely.

Civil liberty = what you can afford, as always. If there's any clampdowns people will just have to work harder to make those connections or dig a bit deeper into their bribery barrels, just like everywhere else in the world.

there's been a similar sort of reaction from the UK government. Talking about compulsory identity cards, beefing up stop and search powers etc. We however have no constitutional garantees. Only the weak human rights act which I noticed the Express was called to be repealed or at least suspended whilst we're 'at war on terrorism'. what's the point of 'fighting for democracy' if our democratic freedoms are eroded at home.

Also on a civil rights thing surely Osama bin Laden has the right as a criminal suspect to a fair trial and can we have our International criminal cour now, please, Mr Bush

Under PACE (the UK Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1994) the police can stop anyone if they have suspicion already. I've been stopped on the way to work.

Didn't Osama lose his right to a fair trial and all that when Bush declared the attack an "Act of War"? Wasn't that, in part, the point of calling it an act of war?