It's wonderful to see old-fashioned conservatives like Roberts pose such questions about the gross contradictions between government policies, their justifications, and the results. I've been posting articles since late 2009 to answer the fundamental question posed in the headline, but the voices of the authors of these articles have been drowned out by the mega-speakers of mainstream media. Could Roberts' numerous questions be a signal that Americans of many political persuasions are finally waking up and asking the right questions?
While such questions are important, after all the crimes committed against both foreign and domestic people during only the past decade, they still fall well short of any examination of the system which has produced an extremely powerful ruling class that has moved beyond the nation's borders. We Americans are no longer of any more importance to them than are people living on the other side of the world. The questions he raises are more typical of questions posed by people who are in a political kindergarten rather that where one would expect them to be--graduate school.
Following the article Roberts lists a number of articles from a website that specializes in reports of the grossest forms of police brutality. While the website uses the phrase "police state", their myopic view is that violations of individual liberties are only instances of abuses by individuals in police agencies.
Our outrage is targeted specifically individual people and individual policies that are responsible for corruption and abuse. We recognize that police are only human and no more corruptible than anyone else. However, that corruption will not be tolerated.And, once again, we see the affirmation that all opposition to a police state must be non-violent!
Our mission is to educate and inform the public about issues that endanger our rights and liberties, and to work to fix them through non-violent means.I imagine that this means we should limit our actions to candlelight marches to city hall.
Actually, it could be argued that such a website will only promote fear of authorities and result in more passivity among citizens. The argument goes something like this: the daily exposure of brutality perpetrated by authorities who use overwhelming violence against peaceful protestors, innocent people, and those suspected of, or arrested for, committing minor crimes will discourage people from any militant actions. The extreme emphasis on the victimization of ordinary citizens, who are required to remain nonviolent themselves, will ultimately encourage passivity in the face of overwhelming violence.
