Thursday, February 26, 2004
POINDEXTER LIVES! (in the nightmares of the ACLU).
In sorting through my office mail, I came across a two identical letters (both addressed to me) from Nadine Strossen, the President of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) asking me to “become the newest card-carrying member of the ACLU.”
My first reaction was to wonder where and how the ACLU got my name to add to its recruitment list. I subscribe to a number of magazines and journals (The Atlantic Monthly, National Geographic, The Wilson Quarterly, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, The American Historical Review, and the Journal of Asian Studies to name a few) but none of them appear to me to be an automatic ACLU-recruiting demographic (not to mention the fact that I always specify that I do not want to receive special offers or notifications from the magazines’ publishers or their friends when I subscribe). It may simply be that I am a university professor and while I think that much of the conservative ranting about American universities as hotbeds of ultra-liberal sentiment is nonsense, perhaps the ACLU is more likely to find recruits in Academia than from mass mailing to the offices of Fortune 500 companies or the Pentagon.
Whatever the case, the letter urges me to join because
Ah, John Ashcroft. Personally, I don’t really care for the guy. On the other hand, I don’t believe, as Ms. Strossen apparently does, that Ashcroft is using the war on terror as an excuse to take away our civil liberties. Rather, he is assaulting our civil liberties because he genuinely believes that it is necessary to fight the war on terror. One can agree or disagree as to whether his particular approach (e.g. enforcing the USA PATRIOT Act) is an effective way to fight terrorism (I happen to think that it is not much more effective than the current system of airport screening) without assuming that Ashcroft is insincere in his enforcement of the current laws like the USA PATRIOT Act. It is only if you have predisposition to regard conservatives as people who harbor secret desires to take away all civil liberties and are merely waiting for a pretext to act on these desires that Ms. Strossen’s depiction of Ashcroft naturally follows.
Whatever the case, I have actually had no small admiration for the ACLU in some instances although I often find its priorities to be a bit misplaced. But Ms. Strossen’s sales pitch isn’t going to go very far with me. Why?
The centerpiece of the letter is the fact that
TIA? You mean the institution that was renamed quite some time ago (now known as the DARPA Terrorism (formerly “Total”) Information Awareness program) and was denied funding by the Senate more than a year ago (noted and celebrated at the time by yours truly here)? Yep, that’s the one.
But it gets better (or worse)
You mean the John Poindexter that resigned from the post in August of 2003, more than six months ago? Yep, one and the same.
To be sure, some argue that the program has been fragmented and modified but remains “disguised but alive.” But if the ACLU is too lazy or too duplicitous to do basic homework on the topic, I don’t think I have much confidence that they are the best organization to lead the charge against what may very well be a real threat to our civil liberties.
In sorting through my office mail, I came across a two identical letters (both addressed to me) from Nadine Strossen, the President of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) asking me to “become the newest card-carrying member of the ACLU.”
My first reaction was to wonder where and how the ACLU got my name to add to its recruitment list. I subscribe to a number of magazines and journals (The Atlantic Monthly, National Geographic, The Wilson Quarterly, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, The American Historical Review, and the Journal of Asian Studies to name a few) but none of them appear to me to be an automatic ACLU-recruiting demographic (not to mention the fact that I always specify that I do not want to receive special offers or notifications from the magazines’ publishers or their friends when I subscribe). It may simply be that I am a university professor and while I think that much of the conservative ranting about American universities as hotbeds of ultra-liberal sentiment is nonsense, perhaps the ACLU is more likely to find recruits in Academia than from mass mailing to the offices of Fortune 500 companies or the Pentagon.
Whatever the case, the letter urges me to join because
“These are, indeed, trying times for civil liberties.”In particular:
“Attorney General John Ashcroft is waging a relentless campaign to undermine our freedom, shamelessly using the ‘war on terror’ as cover for his assault.”
Ah, John Ashcroft. Personally, I don’t really care for the guy. On the other hand, I don’t believe, as Ms. Strossen apparently does, that Ashcroft is using the war on terror as an excuse to take away our civil liberties. Rather, he is assaulting our civil liberties because he genuinely believes that it is necessary to fight the war on terror. One can agree or disagree as to whether his particular approach (e.g. enforcing the USA PATRIOT Act) is an effective way to fight terrorism (I happen to think that it is not much more effective than the current system of airport screening) without assuming that Ashcroft is insincere in his enforcement of the current laws like the USA PATRIOT Act. It is only if you have predisposition to regard conservatives as people who harbor secret desires to take away all civil liberties and are merely waiting for a pretext to act on these desires that Ms. Strossen’s depiction of Ashcroft naturally follows.
Whatever the case, I have actually had no small admiration for the ACLU in some instances although I often find its priorities to be a bit misplaced. But Ms. Strossen’s sales pitch isn’t going to go very far with me. Why?
The centerpiece of the letter is the fact that
“With your help, one of the next challenges our Safe and Free Campaign will take on is resisting development of a Pentagon-inspired Total Information Awareness (TIA) system.”
TIA? You mean the institution that was renamed quite some time ago (now known as the DARPA Terrorism (formerly “Total”) Information Awareness program) and was denied funding by the Senate more than a year ago (noted and celebrated at the time by yours truly here)? Yep, that’s the one.
But it gets better (or worse)
”And who’s in charge of this Orwellian project? It’s none other than John Poindexter, the man who deceived Congress and the American people during the Iran-Contra scandal.”
You mean the John Poindexter that resigned from the post in August of 2003, more than six months ago? Yep, one and the same.
To be sure, some argue that the program has been fragmented and modified but remains “disguised but alive.” But if the ACLU is too lazy or too duplicitous to do basic homework on the topic, I don’t think I have much confidence that they are the best organization to lead the charge against what may very well be a real threat to our civil liberties.
