The story of Yoani Sánchez is a perfect example of why I so jealously guard our constitutional rights to freedom of speech and assembly. If you haven t read the article linked here then you really can t understand why our freedom of speech is one of the most important constitutional rights we are granted.
Too often we . . . enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. – John F. Kennedy
Walking down the street in Cuba to a protest against violence she and her friend were grabbed, tossed into a car, driven around for 20 minutes while being beaten, then dumped from the car near where they were picked up. Sounds like something out of a movie or a story about the old KGB doesn t it? And what was her crime? ‘Since she began signing her name to blog posts she composes in Cuba and e-mails to friends in other countries for publication, Sánchez has received critical acclaim and several awards for her social commentary and missives about everyday life on the island from the government to food to baseball.’ (Hmm’¦ want to complain about our social justice now anyone? Anyone? Bueller?)
In this country recently the DOJ made a request for ALL IDENTIFIABLE information about visitors to indymedia.us an independent news site. This included physical addresses, social security numbers, bank numbers, basically all PII. (Personally Identifiable Information for you non-techies)
That is until they contacted the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the EFF lawyers contacted the DOJ. Then all of a sudden the request was pulled and NO reason given for why it was requested in the first place. This also raised freedom of the press issues with the request. Remember during the campaign team Obama went after several people threatening lawsuits because those people disagreed with the one publically? Or how about flag@whitehouse.gov remember that? In Washington State they tried to force the list of people who signed SR71 (anti-gay marriage) to be made public. For what reason other than to camp out on their lawn like they did to the mayor and his family. Seeing a pattern here? Public shame is now an acceptable means of suppressing speech and political action. Fox news is just the tip of the iceberg, and the one s poster child for any dissent. For those of you who don t live there or know it s all Chicago politics. Bribery, arm twisting, threats, intimidation, and above the law mentality. Welcome to White House 2009! Saul Alinsky would be proud!
So when someone tells you that your opinion doesn t matter (left, right, or middle), or that it won t make a difference just remember the story of Yoani and indymedia.us. They are telling you that because they fear your right to speak your mind. (Can anyone say town hall?) Freedom of Speech, it is a freedom we in this country take for granted every day and shouldn t. People will try to minimalize, marginalize, and polarize you, but at least you won t be scooped up off the street and beaten at random. Yet’¦
And people wonder why I use the name’¦
Consti.
The 2012 Presidential Election is fast approaching
The GOP race is now a field of 4 with only Romney, Gingrich, Paul, & Santorum still standing. Who will be the next candidate to exit the race & who will emerge as the eminent GOP nominee?
Follow us on Twitter & join our 2012 election FaceBook page for updates & new blog articles.
Contact us if you are passionate about politics & want to blog with us.
{ 18 comments… read them below or add one }
Just for the record, I oppose the Patriot Act due to the way it was introduced (during a time of fear and a feeling of vulenrability), the way it is disguised (as a means of combatting “terrorism”) and for what it truly is, a means of controlling the population. I bought into it at first but then, after doing more and more research, turned 180 degrees.
Now, back to the main point of your post:
I agree that the writing is on the wall regarding the policing of speech. Just the fact that these entities tried to get away with these things but were basically caught in the act speaks volumes. When the public caught wind of it, it was either a case of sloppy work on the part of the perpetrators or was simply a case of “testing the waters” to see the reaction so as to know what do differently next time, when it is done for real. The govt is stupid, but not dumb. I, therefore, am inclined to believe the latter.
Oh, and Laura. Please refrain from calling me honey or babe. Not only is it disturbing (shudders) but the fiance doesn’t like it when other women call me that. Thanks.
Ben,
Yes Laura and I do sound like an old married couple. Ironically Ben I was thinking the same thing earlier today. However, portraying an opinion as fact is something I can’t abide. I have provided links to back up my statements only to have those facts ignored completely. I refuse to let someone bully me because my opinion of the facts differs with theirs. And frankly I refuse to let someone misrepresent my opinion back to me to such a degree as to be ludicrous. It’s freedom of speech and frankly if she doesn’t like it why would she continue to comment as she does? Normally one speaks their peace and is done with it. When one wishes to suppress speech they scream louder and talk faster than the other guy and characterize them as “wing-nut”. Alinsky rules my friend and I knew what I would be getting myself into when I started blogging politics. I am sure by now she knows I am not about to change my core beliefs just to fit hers. Nor am I about to continue with the Republican tradition of not defending yourself when misrepresented. I do however thank you for voicing your opinion in the matter and attempting to broker understanding.
Laura,
I present you with facts to back up my statements all the time only to have you attack me personally or insult my intelligence. Why do you think I include links in my articles and comments? I am always willing to discuss things with people, but I am not willing to let someone bully or shame me into their opinion. As I have stated before pushing your buttons is not fun any more because you are predictable in your response and pushing them is SO EASY. All I have to do is mention Dan Rather and you foam at the mouth. I always welcome you to your opinion no matter how venomous your comments. You seldom if ever welcome me to mine. At least I acknowledge your rights to differ with me. This is not the compassionate level headed debate you preach other people should do. So why should I have to be the only one to “play nice”? As I stated in my article and again in my comments, when they tell you your opinion doesn’t count its because they fear your right to it. Ben is right though. The level I have let this come to has reached kindergarten. But then again I am only responding to the attitude I receive on a daily basis.
As always, you are welcome to your opinion Laura. And I have said this before I will defend with my life your right to it although I seldom agree with it.
Thank you very much for the compliment. I try hard.
As a Correctional Case Manager, and a Correctional Officer Sergeant for so many years, voicing my opinion is one luxury to which I am not entitled. If I don’t have the facts, I can’t make a move. I may have an opinion, but I must be willing to allow my opinion to change, should the facts move in that direction.
Ben,
I have presented facts and logic, time and time again. As I always do. But you are right, this is a waste of time. Facts and logic are only valuable to someone who is willing to see them.
One of the things I appreciate about you, Ben. You know the difference between a facts and logical arguments, and opinion.
Oh yeah…
Right now, with the tit-for-tat back and forth between the two of you, it reads like 2 kindergartners squabbling on the playground about whose friend is the biggest tattle-tale.
I understand that I take my part in a lot of back and forth, but I like to think that rather than simply argue, I present facts to back up my argument. This exchange has simply been a cat fight in cyberspace…
And that’s my 2 cents worth…
Blah blah… you don’t even address what I say. Just what you think or would like me to say. Draw your own conclusions all you like and try to project your words onto mine. You still make yourself appear VERY venomous to anyone who disagrees with you. You still belittle people who don’t agree with you. You still do the exact same thing you complain about others doing. Your intolerance to any one who disagrees with you speaks volumes. And you continue to provide me with perfect examples of what I say. Again Laura, thank you.
As always you are welcome to your opinion. I am not about to debate the patriot act with you as it doesn’t pertain to the point of my article. Nor will I justify myself yet again. No matter how many times you try to make me say it it’s not going to sound different to your ears. Simply becasuse you refuse to hear. That’s a YP not an MP.
You’re the one that supports the Patriot Act, not me…Never have, never will…
So, tell me about how much you value the rights of the American people again…
If you read the Patriot Act, the WHOLE thing, not just the parts that you only think apply to you, you will see that the government does not need a warrant, to show probable cause, or to give a reason for the seizure of information if it deems it justified under the Patriot Act. Or to hold any citizen, property or assets for an indeterminate amount of time if it deems it justified either.
So there you go- ignore the facts, dismiss logic…
Blah blah. If a company doesn’t do the right thing it should fail in the market. At al GM should be no more. And I have stated that before. You assume I never read the patriot act. I have news for you as an IT professional I AM REQUIRED to abide by that legislation so I am very familiar with it. If you look in the news recently you will see that the blame game between the FBI and the military has already begun about the Ft Hood shooters ties to a radical Al Queda recruiter and who knew what when. So damned if you do and damned if you don’t eh?
You keep trying to bring up my logic. Again, just because I don’t agree with your views you insult me. Shows that your tone is just as divisive and vitriolic as you complain about in the first place. And makes a perfect example of what my article was about. If they tell you your opinion doesn’t matter it just means they are afraid of your right to free speech. Thank you Laura.
As always you are welcome to your opinions and comments. And I encourage you to continue providing me such good examples of my points.
Patriot Act allows the government to get info without a warrant and without showing probable cause if it feels it is a threat to national security. What “a threat to national security” or “domestic terrorism” is, is for debate, since there are no standards in the legislation and there is no one to uphold those standards. It is all subjective. So the Patriot Act has EVERYTHING to do with Indymedia.
I read your article. Maybe YOU need to read the legislation that you have defended in the past and have argued is justified. It is obvious you haven’t. Maybe if you did, you wouldn’t feel so strongly about defending it and wouldn’t need me to explain how you feed into the very situation you find so appalling.
You have, in other comments, argued that corporations do not need to be held accountable to the public, that the public (via the government, it’s legal arm) has no right to interfere in the business of corporations. You trust in the market to regulate itself. This means that you trust that corporations will do the right thing when left on their own and with no supervision from a balancing power. Since you have constantly reiterated that you have no trust in the government, but you trust in the market and corporations ability to govern themselves, then you trust corporations more than the government. You trust an entity that has no responsibility to the public other than a legal one, which is only enforcable by fines since you cannot arrest and imprison a corporation. And you trust them more than a group made up of those like ourselves that has a moral and ethical responsibility to its citizenry, that we have the ability to change and affect because it IS us.
No wonder you are trying to belittle logic, because that just makes no damned sense…But then again…
You’re funny…
Oh… and who said horrified? It’s not in my article. Neither is trusting corporations. Again, don’t project your words onto my article.
As I said. Pushing your buttons is WAY to easy. And as for logic, you are misrepresenting YOUR opinion as logic. I defended certain aspects of the Patriot act that is true. It is also my opinion. However the patriot act has NOTHING hear that NOT one single thing to do with indymedia there was NO reason given at all for the request. So perhaps you should read the article.
As always you are welcome to your opinion. Apparently you don’t welcome me to mine. Sorry Laura, you are just to easy to push buttons on. And you are not the only person who reads my articles. Yet you manage to comment on EVERY SINGLE ONE! Just means I am doing my job.
Smoke and mirrors… eavesdropping, whatever- forest for the trees. Since you can’t defend that and it doesn’t change the fact you went to the mat for the Patriot Act, which is the very instrument that allowed the Indymedia situation you are so horrified about. As you pointed out, at the time it was put into law, Americans were still being snowed that Iraq had WMD. But it was not unanimously passed the second time around. But it was passed by a majority Republican Congress all the same. I have not defended tha Dems that supported it- I have been against it from day one, as I was against the War in Iraq from day one, despite taking a lot of crap for it (want to talk about wrongful public censure- Dixie Chicks, anyone? But that’s okay, right?)
What I posted had everything to do with what you posted, but then I don’t expect you to see that. I find it amusingly ironic that you used that particular quote from JFK- I completely understand why it grabbed you since it describes you to a T.
You look in horror at what governemtn does with overreaching power without proper oversight, and they have a moral and ethical obligation to us. But you trust in corporations and want no oversight for them, when they have NO moral or ethical obligation to us?
Logic my friend…Try to dismiss it, but you can’t escape it…I applaud your tenacious attempts to, though.
As always you are welcome to your opinion and I encourage you to continue to with it.
Never said I was alarmed about eaveasedropping. Where do I even mention that in the article? Don’t try to inject your words into my statements and every one elses. And I will remind you the patriot act was ALMOST UNANAMOUS so the dems are just as well to blame for your concern over civil rights. And they helped reinstate it. Even hillary voted for the patriot act. Again, nothing of what you comment has anything to do with the article I write. Logic is spelled with 5 letters and a hand has five fingers, but there is only one of those I offer to you. Here is some logic for you published news articles ARE NOT PRIVATE conversations. That has nothing to do with what the DOJ tried to pull on indymedia.
This is exactly the response I expected from you Laura. Pushing your buttons isn’t fun anymore since you are too predictable. All I have to say is Dan Rather and I can get your hackles up.
“Public shame is now an acceptable means of suppressing speech and political action. ” Sorry honey, but public shame is a tool used by any group of people over another, smaller group of people. Older than time, babe, so don’t act like Saul Alinsky or the Dems created it. Ever hear of the little book “The Scarlet Letter” or the Salem Witch trials?
As far as the eavesdropping, etc you are so alarmed about…the right of the government to do that came with the signing of the Patriot Act and other complimentary legislation signed by Bush and the Republican Congress, which you have defended. There the government was given the right to hold and detain without warant or charges, to listen in to internet conversations etc. This gross assault on the rights of the citizens on this nation was not only signed into law once, but renewed four years later nearly as is (under a majority Republican Congress) and is up for renewal again this year. IOf this sickening expansion of government powers is so offensive to yoy, then why aren’t you protesting it. Why aren’t you drawing attention to the fact it is up for renewal? No, you have defended the legitimacy of it, arguing that the security of this nation- what many would refer to as “the common good”- is more important than the possible rights violations that could arise from it. So, your whole main point if moot, if not more than a little hypocritical.
I notice that I am the ONLY person who has pointed out the fact that this monstrosity is up for renewal and have written to all my legislators and signed petition for its repreal. Yet I am the one that does not value the rights of American citizens?
There’s that pesky logic again…