Dean Zimmermann wrote: > My thanks to Mark Snyder and Phyllis Kahn for urging the City > of Minneapolis to pass a resolution urging federal authorities > to respect the rights of local citizens. Personally, I think it > is a great idea and if someone would like to forward to me two > or three sample resolutions from other cities, I would be more > than happy to put something forward to the Council.
Some of you may recall that I was opposed to the City Council passing a resolution opposed to a war with Iraq. I based my opposition on the fact that the City Council does not have sufficient information to make a knowledgeable decision. However, it does not take the resources of an international intelligence agency to know when the individual rights of the city's citizens are being violated and I believe that it is certainly within the purview of the council to protect its citizens from the excesses of Federal and State governments. I agree with Mr. Driscoll's concern that the war on terrorism may result in the same kind of governmental excesses that have occurred historically and one does not have to be a recalcitrant iconoclast to hold such beliefs. Consider the views expressed by Gen. Ralph E. Eberhart, head of the Northern Command (the military organization currently responsible for domestic security). Gen. Eberhard sees no need for an abridgement of civil liberties, for instance..."We just have to be very, very careful that we don't misread some things we see, that we don't jump to conclusions." "Some of the things we did in the 50's with McCarthyism, which I think was a very sad chapter in our history." "Our basic freedoms must be protected." (See complete article in NYT: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50F15F73B5E0C708DDDAB0994DA4 04482 Sorry, but there's a charge). I recently lived though an example of how such overzealotry can negatively impact us as individuals. I had originally assumed that some of the rights that we are surrendering to fight the war on terror involve privacy, surveillance, and searches. I never suspected that I would have to curtail my right of free speech in order to be safe from terrorism. My wife, I and our two small children were boarding a plane in Seattle to return to Minneapolis. At the gate, as we were boarding, I was pulled aside for a security check. My wife tried to step aside to wait for me, but the airline representative insisted that she and the children board the plane. As she was forced down the ramp my two children immediate began crying and she ended up at the door of the plane with two hysterical children, two car seats, and a number of carry-ons, unable to board on her own (and was offered no help from the flight crew). At this point I made an off color remark about situation. Once I was cleared, I proceed down the ramp and helped my family get to our seats. The flight continued without further incident, but as we were deboarding, the pilot made what we considered a rude remark, so at the gate I asked the agent for the name of the pilot, and was told that I would have to get it from him. When I asked him his name as he came into the terminal, he proceeded to tell me that he never had to let us on the plane and that he could have me branded as a trouble maker and that I would have difficulty flying in the future. Well ok I'm sorry, but I have aversion to rude power plays and am not inhibited in tell people my opinion...which I proceeded to do. The pilot, not to be out maneuvered, called security. Needless to say this escalated into a major scene with me suggesting that if I had broken any laws that the airport police go ahead and arrest me, which they declined to do. What was most shocking about this whole incident was that the airline customer service representatives insinuated that we could be charged with threatening a flight crew (I suggested that if this had occurred that I would have been arrested immediately, given the that there is currently zero tolerance for such behavior). Somehow I don't think that the airline safety regulations were intended to suppress customer complaints about airline procedures and rude service. Afterwards I spend sometime checking to see why this this whole thing got started. The airline told us that it was the TSA's regulation that our family be separated, but the TSA denies this. So it's the airline policy that initiated the whole mess and it's the airline that attempted to use governmental laws designed to prevent terrorism to intimidate us into silence. As Mr. Driscoll says, we need to be very careful about what rights we surrender in the war on terrorism. This is just a minor and insignificant example of how additional governmental powers can result in unexpected abuses. We know from American history that governmental abuses can result in much more serious intrusions on our public and private lives. I would therefore urge you to support a city council resolution reaffirming our rights as citizens of Minneapolis and the United States. Michael Atherton Prospect Park _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
