> ----------
> From: Agent Bronson[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > Yes, but that doesn't make it legal. Hey, they've done black bag jobs
> > too, and got caught. See Watergate.
>
> These are abuses that got exposed. But the threat of abuse is a poor
> reason to leave the FBI helpless in the face of modern threats to the USA.
> This is akin to the argument that the death penalty should be banned
> because of the failings in the judicial system. Sure, every mote of power
> you give to a public servant is subject to misuse, but a cop needs his gun
> and a surveyor needs his tripod. The FBI needs to be able to do its thing
> so buildings don't start blowing up.
>
The US would not have a problem with foreign based terrorism if the US
government did not meddle in the affairs of other countries. Does
Switzerland
have a problem with foreign based terrorism? Does Sweden? In the words of
Malcom X: "I think it's a case of the chickens coming home to roost."
As for domestic terrorism - let's not forget that the McVeigh and his
cronies don't appear to have used the Internet at any point in their
activities.
Past abuse, and the threat of future abuse are definitely factors to
consider
when the people decide whether or not they wish to grant a power to
government. As the Founders said: '...a long chain of abuses and usupations
....
[grants the people the right and duty] ...to throw off such government...."
The FBI has repeatedly demonstrated that it will abuse its powers, and there
is
no convincing evidence that it actually cares to clean up it's act - if it
did, a
lot of FBI agents would be finishing their careers in jail. The FBI has a
persistant,
institutionalized and recidivist tendency to abuse, and abuse again,
all the while in denial "It's just a few bad apples - we promise it'll never
happen
again.... (until next time)". Such a history of illegality, along with a
constant
denial of responsibility, would land a *person* in jail, or force the
disbanding of a
corporation. The FBI, on the other hand, seems to be above the law. The
conclusion of many people is that the FBI is, in toto, untrustworthy, out of
control, and dangerous to our liberties.
[It's off-topic, but I and many others DO hold that the death penalty should
be
abolished - as it has been in nearly all the civilized nations of the world]
Your arguments fall perilously close to "the end justifies the means".
> I know it's laughable when an FBI spokesman says "Hey just trust us,
> guys!" But even if we don't trust the FBI, we have to trust the watchdog
> groups and government that guarantees balances. Remember, the FBI's
> primary purpose is to protect the masses - not to read your letters to
> grandma.
>
That may be the stated purpose for which it was chartered, but it's
behaviour
for most of it's history makes it clear that the operational goals include
the
acquisition, expansion, and retention of power for the agency, regardless of
law, morality, or ethics.
Peter Trei
Disclaimer: The above represents my personal opinion only.
