DanMargarita.com

There have always been limits to our freedoms, particularly when concerning public safety. Most famously is the matter of free speech in which Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes declared that you "can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theater," unless of course, there is a fire. That's not information that you should keep to yourself. Presumably, Justice Holmes was referring to the act of intentionally espousing inaccurate information that may cause a "clear and present danger" to the public and immediate harm.

For example: in mid-flight on a 747 it would be improper to yell, "I've got a bomb" for your own amusement when in reality, you do not have one. On the other hand, let's say you and you're date are at the theater one evening, and on your way back from the rest room you notice a small fire in the corner. It would be advisable in this situation to inform others of this fact rather than keeping mum and sneaking out a back door and taking a cab home.

The administration has declared that foreigners charged with crimes could be tried in secret by a military tribunal without a jury, and defendants won't have the same access to evidence as in a civilian trial. The President has used historical precedent to justify this, noting that past presidents have used extraordinary measures during wartime. This follows the time-honored tradition of thinking that because someone did something a long time ago, it's O.K. to do it now. Using this rationale, one could argue that it's O.K. to pillage and murder because Genghis Khan did it.

Some of our earlier Presidents had slaves. Does anyone think we should we resume that practice? More recently, F.D.R had Japanese-Americans interned in camps during the war. Since we were also fighting Italy at the time, how come we didn't imprison Joe DiMaggio as well?

The U.S. has always been quick to criticize other countries for conducting secret trials, most notably when American Lori Berenson was accused of aiding rebels in Peru. Officials in Washington rightfully screamed until Peru relented and gave her a public civilian trial.

Congress already passed tougher laws after the Sept., 11 attack, known as the U.S.A. Patriot Act which is actually an acronym for the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001. This could just as easily been called the Uniting and Strengthening America by Treating Rapscallions And Instigators To Our Revenge (or the U.S.A. Traitor Act).

Attorney Field Marshall,uh, General John Ashcroft announced that the justice department would eavesdrop on conversations between defendants and their lawyers, violating a sacred principle of the American judicial system. So who?'s going to talk openly to their lawyer if they know they're being listened to?

Officials have detained some 1200 Arabic men and plan to question some 5000 Arabic students as a security measure. Civil libertarians have complained that this amounts to racial profiling. In fairness, the Sept. 11 attack as well as the first WTC bombing, the bombing of two U.S. embassies in Africa, the highjacking of the Achille Lauro and subsequent murder of wheelchair-bound passenger Leon Klinghoffer, the millennium bomb plot, and various other actions were not taken by members of the Swedish bikini team. People of Arab/Muslim persuasion took these actions.

So, should we scrutinize visa applicants more closely?

Sure.

Tighten security?

Absolutely.

Adopt a Stalinist legal standard?

Well...

We managed to catch, try and convict those responsible for the first WTC attack, although no one noticed because we were more concerned with Bill Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

Perhaps some people don't think that the American courts are tough enough. Then they've never seen Judge Judy.