Reader Feedback and UET

This feedback stuff is great. A reader writes: Around 1954 there was a very powerful United States government congressional group called the House for Unamerican Activities. Sen. Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin was its head. It was after the Korean War and some in the government were attempting to show our people as well as the rest of the world that we would not tolerate dissidents - communists. Their job was to root-them-out and prosecute. This is also the year that "under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance. Some people were brought up before the House Committee for Unamerican Activities. Some did lean toward, and were of the Communist persuasion. Others may have joined a college organization, or written anti-American articles or given talks which to the committee appeared to be unamerican. A few well may have warranted investigation and prosecution. Some of these like the authors Dashial Hammett and Lilian Hellman were ones who may have crossed the line. Many who were exercising what they thought was the right of free speech and opinion were found to be ostracized, losing their jobs, unable to find work and generally, a black pallor hung over them the rest of their lives. A few, whether justifiably or not, were ruined never to regain a previous way of life due to innuendos and the dark cloud that hung over their heads. It was a mob mentality. The country was on a merry-go-round, it was impossible to get off. President Eisenhower despised McCarthy but was afraid to buck public opinion. Ike was one who understood consequences, oh, so well.In time this committee was discredited and McCarthy was sent home. However it was the total committee with government backing and public support that created this situation. T.V. was fairly new on the scene. The country sat in front of their sets and was mesmerized by the proceedings. (They are available in old video archives, PBS documentaries, and the Internet.) History will always repeat itself with all of its past mistakes. A different time, a different era but always the same. The tide of history will come and go, and will not be stopped. Often one hears, "It is different now, or that can not happen to me, or that won't happen in this country" Have they not heard of Hitler in Germany or Po Pot in the "Killing Fields" of Cambodia? Naive? Perhaps. Or just not understanding that the world turns on its axis, the sun rises and sets and history is only a continuation of repeated foibles and follies - the same issues throughout time - unresolvable. It is very alarming today with all the modern computers and invasive scientific surveillance. No one, or their families or their friends is immune from serious and possibly devastating consequences from written or spoken word. There are no secrets today. Standing up for ones beliefs? But remember, "There is nothing new under the sun." I will add some color, and then some commentary. First of all, I agree in large part with most of the points made. Much of the information, and most of the conclusions, are ones that I have made or alluded to in the past. The House for Unamerican Activities was actually created in 1938 during the height of the Nazi, Communist, and KKK negativity that surrounded World War II. It was made a permanent US committee in 1946. The HUAC was an official government committee until 1975. McCarthy, although in the same vein, came along later. He used the "Red Scare" to take down many political opponents, but when he attacked the Army (an organization with more pull than he had) in 1953, he found that political clout, not publicity, wielded the real power in Washington. I have written to a large extent regarding the references to American historical amnesia. The same events do occur over and over again. This is to be expected, if not supported. I contend, however, that this pseudo-war in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East is different. It is different because it is allowing people like Alberto Gonzales to create new legislation that eliminates basic American rights, such as habeus corpus. The creation and implementation of the Unitary Executive Theory changes our government in an irrevocable manner. The UET, if implemented in its current glory, will replace the President with a king. "Over-reaction!", you may say? Please re-read the story of Jose Padilla, or reference this previous post, and understand the implication of this section of the post: Mr. Padilla is a U.S. citizen, arrested in a U.S. city, by U.S. agents, and taken to a U.S. prison on U.S. soil; without any of the protections of the U.S. Constitution. All because the U.S president willed it so. If a president can do this to one of our fellow citizens, what can't he do? As foreign a concept as this might be to the average American, try to understand that the UET will allow the President to do all of the following: 1. Authorize the arrest of ANYONE. 2. Incarcerate the person for an infinite period of time. 3. Deny the person legal representation. 4. Hold the person without charging them with a crime. 5. Deny the right to petition for a writ of habeus corpus. It is also impossible to deny that, as far as the Executive branch sees, this theory is already in almost full effect. Illegal wiretaps, invasions into foreign countries, authorizing torture, and a myriad of other offenses have already been committed by this President; well within his right, as far as he is concerned. So, in response to the final point posed by the reader, there IS something new under the sun. We have an executive branch that is audaciously and openly transforming our democracy into a monarchy. We have a Congress and a Supreme Court that is, at least currently, allowing it to happen. The media is trying to legitimize it... In Violation of the Constitution- Article I, Section 9 presumes that the privilege of habeas corpus exists absent a valid suspension. (It is phrased as the First Amendment is: "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech,". This clearly presumes that there is a freedom of speech.) Although some of these things happened under Lincoln in the Civil War and FDR in WWII, this differs because Congress had actually declared war in those situations; an expectation of elevated executive power is understood. In this situation, that has not occured, and the executive is still utilizing the UET to his supreme advantage. Although my single voice may not matter at all in the final analysis, it is my duty as a citizen to try to educate the populace, and to heed the words of the Declaration of Independence: "...That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is in the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." Here's one for trying.