A day to day acount of the whacky and wonderful world of Muggaz - i tend to be having too much fun these days, and often cannot remember moments due to debauchery - its time the internet repayed my loyalty by recording my antics.
State before Self?
Published on September 1, 2004 By Muggaz In Politics
The fervour of the Olympics have died down, the patriotism of those countries that did well have not. Over the last few days, I have no doubt that I love my country, and the reasons I love my country are for all to see – however there are plenty of reasons why I should always question those that lead my country, and I will refuse to be blinded by patriotism.

Collectively, Australia is a spirited nation, depicted by the surf, sun and sand – laid back and care free, however we have the dark spectre of our colonial past, with various act’s committed by previous governments that should be, and are, held in contempt. The thing I love about Australia is that we can admit these grievances occurred, and as a nation, we are always moving forward. While cooperatively we are interested in the development of our nation, there will always be that sense of self which is evident in any western culture – self improvement and individualism, personal development, no matter your class, creed, or race.

This brings me to my next point. It’s a big one, and certainly open to interpretation, as the written word always is – my greif is with the P-P-P-Patriot act of the United States of America. Traditionally, I would argue when it comes to patriotism, no one loves their country more than the average American citizen. Australians love their country, but you don’t see flags posted out the front of every second house, and we don’t have figures or gimmicks if you will, like Uncle Sam – well, the boxing Kangaroo can be classed as a gimmick, but the boxing Kangaroo doesn’t need YOU for war – if you know what I mean.

The Patriot act walks all over everything Americans hold dear about their great country – home of the brave and land of the ‘free.’ From the moment an American is born, they are watched by the hawks, or bald eagles, whichever you want to say, I know it’s easy from the outside looking in, but the whole notion of American patriotism appears very authoritarian to me – a state before self if you will.

I am fortunate to know many Americans, some I hold dear, and some not so dear, but the simple fact of the matter is, in America’s eyes, the Patriot act is a good thing because essentially it was created to protect civilians from horrific events such as 9/11 – this tells me a lot about the average American – as long as their personal rights aren’t infringed upon, they don’t really care about the rights of others.

Americans are always having cracks at the French for their justice system, cheesy odours, whatever. In France, you are guilty until proven innocent. The USA is held in high esteem for the free and choice filled image it conveys, however, the rights and freedoms that so many US troops are dying for are being infringed upon with this Patriot act – suspicion should not be enough to invoke the act, hence rendering the liberties Americans hold dear useless.

America is regarded as the leader of the free world, this was true to me before the Patriot act, however, now I am not so sure. With the state before self ideology, the general American is happy with the Patriot act – the average American has nothing to hide from the government, besides, it would be futile as the government has been watching since birth anyway – immigrants come to America for the right to be treated as a normal person, they take American citizenship so they too can enjoy the rights Americans ‘enjoy’. These rights no longer seem attractive.

The Americans aren’t entirely to blame for the Patriot act though – it’s unfortunate that people like the 9/11 hijackers utilised these civil liberties, and used them to spit in the face of America – but when America takes these liberties away based on suspicion, the entire American value system is brought into question. It’s ironic that it is called the patriot act – Americans are patriotic because their country is great – there are only a few countries in the world where you can make yourself with hard work, where you have the liberties to do and say what you want – America is one of these countries, or was one of these countries, until they were attacked because of the very values they are destroying.

Its hard for me to see where America will head towards in the next few years – what their social conscience will say in the back of their heads, based on what I know of America, granted, it may be not so much, though, I do see Americans following their commander and chief just because of the office he represents. It is my honest opinion that America has a problem with personal integrity going out the window because the president says it’s ok – respect the office, not the man, all that kind of talk. The president of the United States of America should command tremendous respect – when the office represents traditional American values of the family and fair go.

Maybe if Australia was attacked in the same fashion, our government would try to try and pass a similar act through our senate, however, I believe such an act would not get of the ground based on the traditional Australian values of giving everyone a fair chance, and you truly are innocent until proven guilty. Australians need to protect their interests by maintaining our national identity, and to maintain out national identity, we need to be consistent with our personal identities – Australia is a beautiful and great country, but my integrity will always come before my countries, and hopefully that holds true for our population, we wont be blindly led by the red white and blue of any flag, state before self sounds like a policy from authoritarian China – there are bad people everywhere in the world, but when you stop trusting the good on their account, it’s an inevitable decline in all that countries like America are perceived to represent.

BAM!!!

Comments (Page 2)
7 Pages1 2 3 4  Last
on Sep 02, 2004

Same in France.  In France you are guilty until proven innocent.

In Canada you can be fined or arrested for saying mean things.

Muggaz: Once, again, I challenge you to give us some specific examples of where this has happened.  You are, essentially, listing some things that privde institutions can do already and do (companies buy and sell my private information all the time - hell, my address and phone are up on Yahoo.com right now, I don't recall giving them permission to list it).

BTW, you are also oversimplifying your list. You should read the US constitution. If our fundamental freedoms started being violated, it would show up in court.  The government still has to obtain a search warrant in some form no matter what or else it's illegal (regardless of how you read the Patriot act, the US constitution is quite specific).

Another aside, what is your obsessive hate for the United States, Muggaz? You're not over here.  Isn't it people like you that bitch that too much of the news is about the US and then you turn around writing article after article about the US?  I'm sure there are several interesting things going on in Australia you could write about.

on Sep 02, 2004
Madine: Indeed, I don't think the UK or Australia have any protections against the government doing what's in the Patriot Act and more.
on Sep 02, 2004
people have been stating that authorities have had these powers, and they have been watching US citizens all along, that the Patriot act makes it more concrete...


I don't know about more concrete, but at least they are being open about what they're doing (watching, etc.) Four years ago I worked as a Crew Leader on the Census in CA. It was my job to approach people about filling out their census questionnaire after members of my crew had already attempted and they would not comply. They were actually required to fill the form out, but we were not allowed to force them. We had to try to convince them (in a non-threatening manner) that it was a good idea. The reason I heard the most often for people not wanting to fill out the questionnaire was that they didn't want the government to know any of that information, they didn't trust the government not to use it against them. My bottom-line reasoning? There was not anything on that questionnaire that the government couldn't find out on their own about a person without the person even knowing it. (No, it wouldn't be right for them to do that, and they did not resort to that for the census, but they could. ) At least by sending out questionnaires for people to fill out they have a chance of answering what they want to answer.

I see that as pretty similar to the Patriot Act. They could keep tabs on us any way they wanted and we wouldn't even know it. At least they've made it official and told us they're going to.

*sits back and waits for mud to fly her way*
on Sep 02, 2004
Don't you find it odd that when someone passes a law that threatens abortion rights they get it overturned in a matter of days or weeks, and yet the big, scary Patriot Act has been floating around drawing hateful diatribe and it has barely been challenged?

Yep, and I'm a bit peeved about it...
on Sep 02, 2004
In Canada you can be fined or arrested for saying mean things.


Yes, California is trying to copy Canada's law, which, although not often enforced in Canada, does allow for the arrest of a church pastor for taking a moral stance on issues such as homosexuality, among other things...
on Sep 02, 2004
Yes, California is trying to copy Canada's law, which, although not often enforced in Canada, does allow for the arrest of a church pastor for taking a moral stance on issues such as homosexuality, among other things...

This is what disturbs me most about the gay lobby. Since going through the public has proven to be slow going, they've attempted to simply hijack public policy through the courts. There was a Canadian on another site (www.armchairarcade.com from the beginning of the summer) who mentioned that one day, it was simply announced in Canada that domestic partners were legally recognized on account of one judges ruling and that now all of Canada should be happy about it. I would be very unhappy if that occured here in America. Roe v. Wade, part two, anyone?
on Sep 02, 2004
The Patriot Act just puts more, if too much, authority into the intelligence agencies when it comes to terrorist activity in the U.S. Granted it may need to be changed to clarify points and to put in clauses which will prevent abuse, but keep in mind it was passed right after the 9/11 strikes, any democratic nation in the world would have passed something similar no matter what you try to generalize or argue, it was a fear of further attacks thing.

Hate to tell you all who think you have privacy, agencies, such as FBI, CIA, NSA, (sorry don't know their world counterparts) do work in the area of National Security, and have had this kind of power since at least World War 2, if you are just waking up to the fact that a Democracy can be more totalitarian than a Totalitarian regime in some aspects (NSK State stresses this covertly), than damn where has your head been? This is not something new, this is something that has been in place for a long time, you can blame the Cold War for it if you must blame something, but that is not going to change anything, have you already forgotten the saying from 1984 by George Orwell "Big Brother is Watching You", well he can watch from a space, email, cell phone, etc.

Refine the Patriot Act but don't start in and complain about National Security Agencies, because you won't see them, unless you are doing something wrong that is a matter of National Security, without the Counter-Espionage and National Security Agencies where would the Cold War have ended, or what would have not been prevented? You will always hear about the mistakes that happen, but never what they did right, because that would give away information to the people they are working against, much like the British versus Russian Intelligence in-between World War 1 and 2, when the UK not only cracked the Russian secret code once, nor twice, but three times, and each time the government came out and told that they had cracked their code, in turn the Russians than changed their code to one the UK couldn't break.

Go ahead and argue that the National Security Agencies are outdated and should be done away with, and watch how quickly your country gets attacked by some terrorist group who just plain doesn't like you, which should be self-evident when the US Intelligence Agencies made cutbacks in 1998, which allowed 9/11 to happen, which fueled the fire for the creation of the Patriot Act. Be informed or be uninformed. Ignorance is not an excuse when it comes to Intelligence.-End For Now

EDIT: As a sidenote, did the US sign the papers at the Geneva Convention?
on Sep 02, 2004
Another aside, what is your obsessive hate for the United States, Muggaz? You're not over here. Isn't it people like you that bitch that too much of the news is about the US and then you turn around writing arti


If i was interested in Australian affairs only, I would hardly spend my days on a predominantly American blog site, where I have the oppurtunity to learn about International affairs.

I was inspired to write this article because of the American patriotism I see on Joe User - a lot of people love their country here, and rightly so - there are a few article in particular that inspired this one - my true agenda for this article was to state that everything the United States fights for - freedoms etc, well, they are under threat, and by the US publics own decisions, the United States of America is becoming a softcore police state - as I mentioned in the article - The USA has always been the bench mark leader of the free world, a little re-phrasing, and the USA is the leader of the world, I just think it's quite ironic that the values Americans love and strive to protect are under question by this very act.

Whether you like it or not Brad, the reason I question the Patriot act, is because I do look up to America, as a citizen of the 'free' world, and I know my government has a penchant for going along with the United States, by hook or by crook, whether I respect the United States or not, I will not be a happy citizen if we have something like the Patriot act passed here - I dont want a police state.

You are correct, I am writing this article as an Australian, that still enjoys the privacy of my personal records, until I am charged or a warrant is issued based on proof - Americans live in a great country. I live in a better one.

Madine: Indeed, I don't think the UK or Australia have any protections against the government doing what's in the Patriot Act and more.


No one can acces sour records based on suspicion. If they do so - it's illegal, and no Australian judge will allow it in court.

BAM!!!

on Sep 02, 2004
I think an interesting question is, how do the freedom's of countries like Australia, the UK, and France stack up to the US (with the Patriot Act)


It IS an interesting question, but irrelevant to the article at hand, which is really how does the US (post-PATRIOT) stack up against the US (pre-PATRIOT)?

The government still has to obtain a search warrant in some form


That may be true, but when the standard for obtaining the warrant is lowered from "probable cause" to "just because", requiring a search warrant suddenly seems rather pointless.

I personally believe that the Patriot act was an overreaction to the terrorist attacks, that it has eroded our civil liberties, and that it is too vague and overly broad, especially in the area of "domestic terrorism." Under the Patriot act, it is possible that the protesters at the RNC (or the ones at the DNC, for that matter, if there were any) could be arrested and have all their assets seized. This would be because of some of the brawls that reported broke out between them and counter-protesters (as reported here on JU by Couchman). That qualifies as "a criminal act that is dangerous to human life" that is "intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population." And if you think no law enforcement agency would ever try to characterize it as such, I would have to call you exceedingly naive. Just google for "Patriot Act Abuses" and see what turns up.

By the way, I'm being generous in calling it an "overreaction"; I could label it an "opportunistic power grab in the wake of national disaster."
on Sep 02, 2004
One of the less known facts about the patriot act is that it gives the government the right to detain you for 72 hours without charging you, and without giving you your miranda rights. The police can then release you without ever recording your arrest, and without contacting anyone about your arrest. Habeas Corpus has also extended to a 72 hour holding period.
on Sep 02, 2004
I just wonder how meny Democrats had been pushing for this type of Act during the Oklahoma bombing, Waecko, and right wing militia threats in the 90s. Now how many are on the other side?

Just wondering
on Sep 02, 2004
One of the less known facts about the patriot act is that it gives the government the right to detain you for 72 hours without charging you,


Little known fac: prior to the Patriot Act, you could be held for up to 48 hours with no charges filed or miranda warnings, so this didn't change much. ALSO, a legal technicality that has existed for a LONG time is that if you can be pinned down as being at the scene of a crime, you can be held indefinitely without charges; this is how they held me back in 1988; making very sure I knew I wouldn't see the light of day until they had extracted a confession (no miranda rights read....ever).
on Sep 02, 2004
Damn, Gideon, what did they accuse you of?

I think most people don't know how much their country's perspective NSAs have, and that's just sad.
on Sep 02, 2004
Gideon actually they were limited to 24 hours, so now they can hold you thrice as long. I understand that you can be held if they can pin you down at the scene of the crime, I was indicating that now the police have been given the right to hold you for three days and three nights for not commiting a crime, if for example they don't like you or you may happen to be a minority and they are discriminiatory against you.
on Sep 03, 2004

History is a good teacher.  In the civil war, Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus entirely.  In World War II, thousands of Japanese American CITIZENS were rounded up and put in camps.

And now, after the largest foreign attack on US soil ever, we're sweating the Patriot Act? An act that expires, and as a practical matter hasn't changed anything? Muggaz, you're in Australia, ever look at what the authorities can do to you if they want?

When the police start rounding up people on bogus terrorist charges and holding them let me know.

7 Pages1 2 3 4  Last