The past comes back....

I find political science to be an interesting arena of study, especially when dealing with legal aspects. Fischer writes about the trial of the hijackers in Berlin, and quotes Judge Stern from the bench in Berlin: " Without the Constitution, the Secretary of State would have the power to arrest any person without cause, to hold a person incommunicado, to deny an accused the benefit of counsel, to try a person summarily and to impose sentence- all as a part of the unreviewable exercise of foreign policy." (164)

Although it escapes me now, there is a Supreme Court case mentioned earlier in the semester that, in one of the opinions, states that the decision allows the president a vast power, something he will be able to pull out at anytime and use whenever he feels. (Korematsu perhaps?) I felt then that it could be and has been used by the administration as a political pressure tool to keep things in check, especially by asserting the executives emergency powers. Stern, in his opinion, echoes the same thing, but from a different time. History repeats itself.

For most of 2001, 2002, and 2003, Sterns warning was a daily reality in Guantanamo. This exercise of foreign policy met critical rebukes from the European Union and other foreign nations, and was questioned domestically. Until Abu Garhaib, this was the case. It seems like it takes a major scandal or political shakeup to have this administration effectively alter its policy on the detainee situation. The point man, Mr. Gonzales, is now himself on the hotseat, and the FBI has been busted for illegal spying. There are now hearings for gross violations of the Patriot Act, and soon, we may be seeing a shift back towards a level of normalcy in all of this political mess. The worst thing, however, is that we have failed to learn from the past, to paraphrase Schmidt, we are a political state of know-nothing pork barrel ignorance. We have failed in several areas, and we are still making our Cold War mistakes on foreign policy today. Maybe if we took our cold war era warnings more seriously, we could avoid our problems today get our nation and our policies back on track.

Surprising? Not to those of us in the know...

While reading John Podesta's article in the reading assignment, he writes: "The breath and the scope of the redaction of government information is astounding..... the federal aviation administration has removed data from its website on enforcement actions against air carriers...." Well, what are those enforcement actions? Some are security, some are airspace infractions, some are major, some are minor. What Podesta fails to mention is the fact that the air carriers rarely feel the effect of the silencing policy.

We, the little pilots of America, are the ones who are villified and made to deal with the media and the FAA. If a commercial airliner, on an instrument flight plan, strays into the ADIZ (Air Defense Initiation Zone) around Washington, DC, the pilot can take corrective action without having the air force up their butts. If I were to do that same thing, while on an instrument flight plan with my little cessna, I'd have F-16s dispatched, I'd be forced to land, interviewed by the FAA, FBI, Homeland Security, and other groups. How do I know this? Several newsworthy articles that vilify me and my plane as being "possible terrorists" 767's and 757's took out targets on Sept. 11th, not Cessnas. Why is the government being so selective with its secrets, which aren't secrets?

It's simple. The administration and its agencies failed miserably on 9/11. Its touted security and its control over aviation was lost that day. The airlines simply need to recover, and it leaves the little guy to get picked on. Its not just happening in aviation, its happening everywhere, as Podesta says. While most people dont care about the violations (which STILL do occur), they would rather see the little guy get vilified than the big guy. And trust me, those terrorists didnt need ground school to fly those planes, any person with a computer and a copy of Microsoft flight simulator can do it. I guess I should be proud to say: I'm one of 411,000 AOPA members who didnt get an aviation-related infraction today, and I'm also one of over 2,000,000 registered pilots in the US who hasn't committed an act of terrorism with my plane.....

Scheppele, the Cold War, and 9/11

The more things change, the more they stay the same.....

While reading Scheppeles essay on Law in times of emergency, I found myself agreeing with her as to the reasons we might be failing in our foreign and domestic policies. We have not, and may never let go of our Cold War mentality. Why? Its too difficult. Gone are the days of Congressional checks on power, and thanks to FDR, gone are the days of a politically impartial court. (i.e. packing the courts) It is safe to say that in the days following World War 2 and the first shots fired in the Korean War, the shift of power domestically has permanently shifted to the executive. As the Constitution adapted to this change of power, and as the other branches did as well, the executive branch changed but failed to evolve. The notion of Cold War power exists today, and while the rest of the world has moved on, we have failed to do so.

I think the best spotlight of this exists in the form of the European Union. While there are nations fighting the War on Terror abroad, they're doing it very sensitively and without compromising domestic rights and liberties. These nations have abandoned Cold War protectionist ideals for a more open viewpoint on how to fight this new style of war, a war that cannot be militarily fought the war the United States fought in Grenada, Nicaragua, Vietnam, etc. Militarily overstretched, we have our executive going with a clear and present danger threat to Iran right now, as we are fighting in Afghanistan, Iraq, with heavy military presences in Korea, Japan, Saudi Arabia, and a small fighting/advising contingent in Somalia. This seems to be the position the terrorists like best: spreading America out, then causing chaos. They cannot overrun the United States, just from a tactical standpoint its a sheer impossibility. But they can militarily and financial destroy it, and they have found the perfect way to do it: our flawed system of thinking and through simple political theory. It seems to me that the government is going about this with the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it mentality". Well, just because your 1950's Ford fairlane still runs, it doesn't mean its reliable, safe, comfortable or logical. Sometimes, you just need to admit defeat and update your reality.....