Brother Z-dr has wrongly stated here that I am a staunch Republican and a right-or-wrong supporter of President Bush, no matter what. This post should put that misconception to rest and give proof to his bias. I have said often here that, when I feel the Bush administration is wrong, I would be among the first to sound off with my disagreement. I have already doen this previously. This is yet another such statement of my displeasure and it is specifically trageted toward President Bush and his administration.

I have several MAJOR problems with the Bush administration so far that cause me great concern as an American citizen. Here are but a few of these. Sjould other such concerns arise in the future, you can bet I am not in the least bit shy about saying it here and everywhere else I can do so.

Over the past weekend there were the quiet, barely mentioned, news reports of what I consider to be a massive assault on our freedoms by the Bush administration. I am outraged by this creeping insinuation of a pervasive central government into the daily lives of law abiding citizens who are doing nothing more than simply going about their lives, not breaking any laws or doing anything to warrant such intrusive micro-inspections of them, their persons, their effects and their Constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy and security in all of those things.

Our Founding Fathers were justifiably concerned about the practices of the British empire's governing practices that allowed British officials to rummage through the homes, papers and effects of the colonists or detaining them for unlimited time without providing any probable cause for doing so other than a suspicion, however unfounded or nebulous it may have been. The Fourth Amendment to our Constitution was their response to any government they might form as a result of the victory and freedom they had purchased for their posterity at such great cost and says it all very eloquently.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath of affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

These eloquent words say it all. Neither federal nor state nor local government agents may search, look at, obtain or inspect the private papers, effects, homes or persons of the citizen unless they specifically identify who it is they wish to search, what specifically it is that they wish to look at, where it is located and - most importantly of all - Why. In order to be allowed to do this, they must go before a legal authority (a judge or magistrate) and swear under oath (under penalty of perjury if they lie, supposedly) exactly WHY they wish to do these things and delineate specifically where and what they wish to search and/or seize. Neither may the government use private entities (other people or firms), acting as their agents, to do these things prohibited to the government according to numerous subsequent court rulings.

Our nation was born of men and women who were adamantly free and wished to remain that way. They had, and demanded, the right to move about freely, without seeking "permission" from any government or potentate or military force. Our citizens are still that way and rightly so. This is not the former Soviet Union where its citizens needed official govenment blessing to travel, even within the borders of their own nation. In France, citizens of that nation cannot simply go to another city and stay in a hotel without displaying approved documents, including their our country's passport. Until now, here in the United States the only limit on a citizen's right to travel anywhere within the country that was not a restricted area for national security reasons was only contingent upon them having the cash, means and will to make the trip by whatever method of transportation they choose.

Late last week there was brief mention in news reports that Lockheed-Martin has begun implementing the first testing of a multi-million dollar program for the U. S. government at three undisclosed U. S. airports. The program is called "CAPPS-II" and, in essence, it has airlines gather information about EVERY passenger including credit reports, banking activity data, criminal records checks and other highly personal information and give that data to federal employees. That data is then used by federal agents who were flipping burgers at McDonalds a few months ago to assign a security classification to each passenger before they ever board the aircraft, even if the trip is as simple as a commuter hop or family vacation!

September 11^th was an abomination and an atrocity, but this so-called "solution" to homeland security is an insidious inroad to Orwell's "1984" world of a pervasive and overbearing "Big Brother" that we DON'T NEED and SHOULD NOT ALLOW! The camel got his nose, head and shoulders inside the tent with wrong-headed and invasive attempts to fight a war on drugs and on crime with banking laws that require our bankers to report us should we deposit or withdraw more than an amount the government thinks is appropriate from our personal accounts. RICO and Seizure Statutes allowed the government to charge power boats, cars and even cash itself to be charged with a crime, even though none had been proved, and made it near impossible for the rightful owner to reclaim his or her property.

Drug war efforts gave police the right to detain passengers in interstate, and even intrastate, travel at airports, bus depots and train stations and demand that the citizens "voluntarily" submit to a search of them and their personal effects. Should they refuse, they are detained on "suspicion" and searched anyway. We blithely accepted the need for these wrongs perpretrated on others because we thought they really didn't affect us personally. After all, they were only doing this to drug smugglers and money launderers, weren't they?

Like Hell they were! Police in Alabama stopped a black man at an airport while he was on the way to to another state. He had cashed in his savings and was on the way to purchase a large number of nursery plants and a truck to haul them home at his destination. He had over $10,000.00 in cash concealed on his person in an effort to prevent being robbed by thieves. Unfortunately for him, the thieves he encountered carried badges. They refused to accept his explanation that he was on a legitimate mission, that he intended to start a new business for himself and the cash was for those purposes because he had been advised the sellers would only accept cash. They seized all of his cash and voided his airline ticket, leaving him stranded, penniless, after being held for more than 72 hours with no criminal charges filed against him. In fact no such charges were ever filed against him. As a result, the man faced spending more than $50,000.00 to try to recover his own money.

In order to fight the seizure, he was required to post a CASH ONLY bond in an amount equal to FIVE TIMES the amount the Gestapo-like cops had seized. On top of that he faced enormous legal bills in a fight that even the most jaded observer recognized to be stacked against him from the outset. You see, the Constitution does not presume that a car, or a boat, or a house, or CASH is innocent until proved otherwise in a court of law. It is guilty and it is up to the owner to prove otherwise. Under these laws, the legal deck is stacked against the rightful owner to begin with and, if he loses his fight, he has to pay the costs of litigation as well. And, guess who gets the money or property that is seized... that's right, the government agency that seized it.

An airline flight is a private commerical transaction that has certtain public implications. Mohammed Atta and his 18 Saudi, Pakistani and Egytian fiends justify the need for REASONABLE pre- and in-flight security precautions but, once again, our government bureaucrats are trying to shove the camel's smelly backside into our tent of personal freedom.

An elderly, grandmotherly type who is obviously of western European descent and her four year old grandson were recently strip searched here prior to being allowed to board a flight between a major U. S. city and another major U. S. city. Meanwhile - ON THE VERY SAME FLIGHT - four single, young men of obvious Arab descent, wearing the accoutrements of their Islamic faith and travelling as a group were allowed to board the flight unremarked after the barest minimum of inspection or search. THAT IS IDIOCY in the name of political correctness.

If those men and others of their race, national origin or religious beliefs are to be offended by being subjected to suspicion and heightened scrutiny because of their ethnic and religious backgrounds, they should direct their ire and discomfort at the true cause for those steps of reasonable security. It was madmen who looked and acted like them who did those horrendous crimes against humanity at the World trade Center in 2001 and in 1993 and at many other places and times around the world.

Our law enforcement agencies have gone from looking for criminal suspects who are of a specific race or ethnic type because that is how the suspect was identified to questioning to imposing needless insults on others who bear no resemblance whatsoever to the perpetrator. They do so because doing the intelligent thing may offend members of the race of the person who did the crime. That is a stupid waste of limited law enforcement dollars and resources.

Similarly, the guy in seat 32-F on a flight from Demoines to Indianapolis who may have a few black marks on his credit report represents not a single threat to me or any other traveler in this nation! CAPPS-II is wrongly intrusive and potentially the start of unchecked tyranny we cannot permit. An American citizen is not required by law to carry ANY identification on his or her person, but that freedom disappears if you try to buy an airline ticket. Now, you have to have a government issued identification, e.g. drivers' license, passport, ID card, etc. or you can't fly to your parent's funeral in another city or take a pleasure trip to visit a friend in another city.

Someone needs to tell John Ashcroft and George W. Bush they are going about a necessary and essential task the wrong way and they must STOP NOW! None of the 19 murderous idiots who commandeered those planes on September 11, 2001, were U. S. citizens. NOT ONE OF THEM had bad credit records and subsequent investigation has yet to turn up any banking activity that would have triggered any suspicion had the information been available prior to their boarding those flights.

ATTENTION GEORGE W. BUSH and JOHN ASHCROFT! Just who the Hell are you claiming that you are trying to protect and from what? From whom? How in the name of reason does CAPPS-II accomplish any of those goals? Even if it does provide useful information, is the data you obtain accidentally worth the price of personal freedom from intrusive and tyrannical government snooping all of the rest of us have to pay?

I submit it is far too high a price to pay and I will work myself to exhaustion trying to stop this effort before it becomes widely used. As much as I despise Bill Clinton as a human being, much less as a politician, he could conceivably be classified as a high risk threat on a commercial flight one day because of his documented legal record. That would be an abominable wrong and should not happen, not even to him. Neither should it happen to the guy who lives down the street who has had his car repossessed twice now, has been sued in local courts for non-payment of bills numerous times, has been arrested a couple of times for misdemeanor idiocy, has no drivers' license because he has been convicted of DUI more than a few times and is buying a ticket with cash so that he can go see his dying father while there is still time for him to do so.

At thr same time, gentlemen, you don't have any probable cause for knowing what books I check out at the library unless I check out five books on how to build a bomb and the autobiography of Usama bin Laden while wearing a shirt that reads, "Death to American imperialists!" THEN, I might consider you have probable cause to investigate and take rational, reasonable steps to find out what I am up to and why. The Fourth Amendment even tells you exactly how you can go about doing that properly. We need to purge the Patriot At of the right for government snoops gathering information without specific warrants about what any citizen watches on his or her television set. Don't laugh, folks, that is exactly whatthey are starting to do. Should you watch movies about murder frequently, the feds would be able to classify you as a potential suspect if there is a murder near where you watch your tube.

Does anyone else see the insidious and invidious nature of this prospective asault on our personal freedoms? Has anyone allowed themselves to become so cowed by the potential for terrorist acts that they would have us all snivel, whimper and grovel in mindless fear as slaves? Should we give up our own freedom because such cowards exist? Must we become subjects of the next Reich "for the children" or "for senior citizens?"

All right, Z-dr. Despite your beliefs to the contrary, you now have read a specific blast against President Bush, his administration and several of its policies from a guy you thought could see no wrong in the man or the people. I just proved you wrong. You are the only poster here I expect to respond no matter what. You carry a badge and have the authority to infringe on the rights and personal freedom of anyone in your jurisdiction. How do you view these efforts I see as especially misguided and dangerous?

And, just for the record, some may call these viewpoints I hold to be "liberal." They too are wrong. Such a position is at the very foundation of true conservatism. Now, there's a frightening thought for you. If you agree with my beliefs, you might be a conservative!