We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Evidence
By Mary Theroux • Wednesday January 18, 2012 3:37 PM PDT • 8 Comments
I posted earlier about the provisions of the New Years Eve-signed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) a/k/a the “Homeland Battlefield Bill,” allowing the President of the U.S., at his or her sole discretion, to order the indefinite detention of any U.S. citizen, with no burden of proof whatsoever, and no recourse for the detainee—in fact making the President judge, jury, and jailer.
Congress now proposes to provide U.S. bureaucrats the power to block any internet site or provider, with no due process or recourse available to the blocked sites. A group of distinguished law professors has gone through the proposed legislation, Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), also known as House Bill 3261, and advises that it would:
Allow the government to block internet access to any website that ‘facilitated’ copyright or trademark infringement—a term that the Department of Justice interprets to mean nothing more than having a link on a web page to another site that turns out to be infringing.
The professors go on to warn:
By failing to guarantee the challenged web sites notice or an opportunity to be heard in court before their sites are shut down, SOPA represents the most ill-advised and destructive intellectual property legislation in recent memory.
I would go farther and propose that its passage would add another nail in the coffin for the expectation that government always and forever bears the burden of proof prior to being able to deprive anyone of his or her freedom or property.
Further, the legislation provides government the surely nearly irresistible cover for gaining control over a medium that poses the perhaps greatest threat to its exercise of limitless power.
The totalitarian regimes targeted by the “Arab Spring” found themselves unable to withstand the power of the people connected through the internet. Today, those in power everywhere, from petty bureaucrats to despots, must certainly be feeling vulnerable and eagerly seeking the means to disarm dissenters, of which the internet is a hotbed. Whatever else its aims, SOPA fills this bill quite nicely for the U.S. government. Governments everywhere, from China to Venezuela, must be drooling at the prospect of soon being able to pass their very own SOPA.
The call has gone up for massive protests and a campaign of calls and letters to elected representatives to stop SOPA and its Senate-equivalent, the PROTECT IP Act. However, after similar outcries of a vast majority against the TARP legislation of 2009, and the passage of ObamaCare, we must not be surprised if such protests fail to stop this incredibly dangerous power grab.
After all, the concept of “representation” is so 18th century.
Tags: Business, Censorship, Civil Liberties, Civil Society, Constitution, Corporatism, Entertainment, Intellectual Property, Law, Liberty, Nanny State, Personal Liberty, Police, Power, Presidential Power, Property Rights, Surveillance, Terrorism, The State 
Hear, hear!!
richard | Jan 19, 2012 | Reply
I thought governments in (some) other places already DID effectively control the Internet in ways like this.
But yes, (people in) those governments not (yet) exercising such control truly WOULD/DO drool over the prospect of exercising such control. As do still others “outside” those governments but exercising extensive control over those governments.
Control, control, control (or, what to do with your army).
N. Joseph Potts | Jan 21, 2012 | Reply
We should not be surprised over the fact that, as the American people came to trust the government like those in Europe in 1500 trusted the church, the government got larger and our natural freedoms became a threat to the new aristocracy. Here are a couple of things they don’t teach in school anymore. “Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.” (Thomas Jefferson) “Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” (George Washington) We have let our public servants become our public masters.
D. M. Mitchell | Jan 22, 2012 | Reply
Mary Theroux, 1/22/2012
Re:Reichmarschall Hermann Wilhelm Goring
Statements recorded by Gustave Gilbert’s
Gilbert’s Nuremberg Diary (1947)
Goring:”Naturally,the common people don’t want war;neither in Russia nor in England nor in America,nor for that matter in Germany.That is understood.But,after all,it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy,and it is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy,or a fascist dictatorship,or a parliament,or a communist dictatorship.”
Gilbert:”There is one difference.In a democracy,the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives,and in the United States only congress can declare wars.”
Goring: “Oh,that is all well and good,but,voice or no voice the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.This is easy.All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked,and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.It works the same in every country.”
Thanking you for this opportunity to comment.
James de Laurier | Jan 22, 2012 | Reply
Every government in history has used control of the media to silence political and cultural dissent. NDAA 2012 also gives color of law to tracking, apprehending, incarcerating, even killing people with no due process allowed, no judicial recourse. It’s effective Mar. 3, 2012.
Stalin would be proud of the fascist model of International Socialism Obama is installing. Be prepared to LIVE FREE OR DIE TRYING!
David McElroy | Jan 23, 2012 | Reply
Thanks. I now have 2 more euphemisms to add to my book:
elected
representatives
stupidamerkin | Jan 23, 2012 | Reply