Speaking of 1984!

------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rense.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Happy New Year It's 1984 - Bush's Orwellian Address By Jacob Levich 10-26-1

Seventeen years later than expected, 1984 has arrived. In his address to Congress Thursday, George Bush effectively declared permanent war -- war without temporal or geographic limits; war without clear goals; war against a vaguely defined and constantly shifting enemy. Today it's Al-Qaida; tomorrow it may be Afghanistan; next year, it could be Iraq or Cuba or Chechnya. No one who was forced to read 1984 in high school could fail to hear a faint bell tinkling. In George Orwell's dreary classic, the totalitarian state of Oceania is perpetually at war with either Eurasia or Eastasia. Although the enemy changes periodically, the war is permanent; its true purpose is to control dissent and sustain dictatorship by nurturing popular fear and hatred. The permanent war undergirds every aspect of Big Brother's authoritarian program, excusing censorship, propaganda, secret police, and privation. In other words, it's terribly convenient. And conveniently terrible. Bush's alarming speech pointed to a shadowy enemy that lurks in more 60 countries, including the US. He announced a policy of using maximum force against any individuals or nations he designates as our enemies, without color of international law, due process, or democratic debate. He explicitly warned that much of the war will be conducted in secret. He rejected negotiation as a tool of diplomacy. He announced starkly that any country that doesn't knuckle under to US demands will be regarded as an enemy. He heralded the creation of a powerful new cabinet-level police agency called the "Office of Homeland Security." Orwell couldn't have named it better. By turns folksy ("Ya know what?") and chillingly bellicose ("Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists"), Bush stepped comfortably into the role of Big Brother, who needs to be loved as well as feared. Meanwhile, his administration acted swiftly to realize the governing principles of Oceania: WAR IS PEACE. A reckless war that will likely bring about a deadly cycle of retaliation is being sold to us as the means to guarantee our safety. Meanwhile, we've been instructed to accept the permanent war as a fact of daily life. As the inevitable slaughter of innocents unfolds overseas, we are to "live our lives and hug our children." FREEDOM IS SLAVERY. "Freedom itself is under attack," Bush said, and he's right. Americans are about to lose many of their most cherished liberties in a frenzy of paranoid legislation. The government proposes to tap our phones, read our email and seize our credit card records without court order. It seeks authority to detain and deport immigrants without cause or trial. It proposes to use foreign agents to spy on American citizens. To save freedom, the warmongers intend to destroy it. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH. America's "new war" against terrorism will be fought with unprecedented secrecy, including heavy press restrictions not seen for years, the Pentagon has advised. Meanwhile, the sorry history of American imperialism -- collaboration with terrorists, bloody proxy wars against civilians, forcible replacement of democratic governments with corrupt dictatorships -- is strictly off-limits to mainstream media. Lest it weaken our resolve, we are not to be allowed to understand the reasons underlying the horrifying crimes of September 11. The defining speech of Bush's presidency points toward an Orwellian future of endless war, expedient lies, and ubiquitous social control. But unlike 1984's doomed protagonist, we've still got plenty of space to maneuver and plenty of ways to resist. It's time to speak and to act. It falls on us now to take to the streets, bearing a clear message for the warmongers: We don't love Big Brother. ___ Jacob Levich (jlevich@earthlink.net) is an writer, editor, and activist living in Queens, New York.

------ End of Forwarded Message

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

Answers

Ugh, I am liking Dubya less and less as the time goes by, he keeps reaching new and herefore uncharted depths of taking away our Constitutional Rights at every turn!!!

"Folks who are willing to give up freedom in exchange for security deserve neither" to paraphrase my favorite saying of old Ben, who was worried about us being a nation of wooses and selling out our hard won Freedoms to the Devil 200 years ago.

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

What really has me nervous is this new "office of homeland security". What do you suppose this actually involves? How many of our freedoms will be taken away eventually by the security police??!!

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

For the last few weeks I have pondered the meaning of "the land of the free". Stuck with a president I didn't want, chosen over another equally bed candidate, making decisions I don't like for reasons I don't trust! Good that I can speak my 2 cents here. I'd bet that few of you can really imagine what it's really like being a foreigner living in this country right now, even a foreigner from Dubya's closet ally.

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

Yup, there's lotsa reason to be concerned from what I can tell but the good news is that alot of the bill sunsets in four years and they'll have to revote to reinitiate it.

And I'm happy to say my Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) was the ONLY dissenting vote in the Senate. I like him. He's got guts enuf to go against the prevailing winds and he practices what he preaches regarding campaign finance reform in that he voluntarily limits contributions and accepts NO PAC money.

-- Anonymous, October 29, 2001

John, you mean Byrd of WV voted for it??? After speaking so voluminously against it??? The old fart better not have! He is one of the few Congressmen that I have any repsect for left!

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

I think in the Senate it passed 99-1, Fiengold being the lone dissenting vote.

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

Hey, John, I'm glad Feingold was a dissenting vote too. But I'm disappointed the same cannot be said for Kohl. >:-( I'd vote for Feingold again in a heartbeat, even though I haven't always agreed with him on everything. Do you have his website? There are often interesting things to read there. Right now, you can read his remarks regarding this bill.

http://feingold.senate.gov/

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

Yeah Joy, I like him alot too. Anyone they call a "maverick" can't be all bad! The guys got integrity and I admire that. I thot Newmann was going to bury him in the last election cause he was spending LOOOTSA $$$$ but Russ squeeked thru and I'm really glad of it.

-- Anonymous, October 30, 2001

John, I am also somewhat relieved that parts of this terrible bill will be sunsetted in four years. I have heard, however, that a lot of the worst parts are not being sunsetted. I'd like more info there.

And the paranoid part of me thinks that a lot of damage can be done in four years--perhaps enough damage to assure passage of the bill without the sunset clauses in four years.

Good for Feingold! I'm blown away that so many legislators voted for this. Could it be they just made a snap judgement, without really considering the ramifications, due to their excitement at teh conveniently timed anthrax business?

JOJ

-- Anonymous, October 31, 2001

JOJ, I downloaded the "Patriot Act" from the site you quoted on the Anarchy forum. Good grief...........214 pages. I am entirely certain in my heart that almost (I say almost in hopes that SOMEONE other than the person who typed it) no one read this bill before voting. I am wading through it page by blankity-blank blank page and trying to form an informed opinion on what it all means.

-- Anonymous, October 31, 2001