Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Judge Napolitano - On Beck - On Wikileaks




"When the government does evil in our names and lies about it we should know about it" - Judge Andrew Napolitano

"One of the ways you restrain the government is by exposing it" - Judge Andrew Napolitano

The government cannot, and should not, suppress dissent by silencing the press, or free speech or free thought (etc.), and the government cannot, and should not, suppress the spread of information by interfering in commercial relationships.

You cannot shut down the printing presses by withholding ink.
You cannot shut down TV and Radio shows by coercing sponsors.
You cannot shut down the Internet by regulating it.

Information will be spread one way or another!

We ARE living in perilous times.. and apparently, the way our government has been reacting, it isn't such a far journey to East Germany.


Big Sis, Janet Napolitano, is saying, "If you see something, say something".
Well, I am seeing a government that is becoming way too authoritarian, and straying from its Constitutional principles... and I am saying something.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Is 100% of what wikileaks has published a case of our government doing evil and lying about it? Is any of it going to cause the death of innocent people? If it does what should be the recourse. I know if I knowingly aquire stolen goods I can go to jail. Shouldn't assange go to jail? Isn't he involved in an espionage conspiracy to harm the U.S.? What should be the punishment for a spy? I would prefer a public trial, a guilty sentence and life in prison. I would accept that Assange and all his co-conspiritors simply disappear or are "suicided".

Judy Aron said...

Interesting opinion coming from someone who wishes to remain "Anonymous".

The fact that you would accept people "disappearing" or being "suicided" is pretty shameful actually... but that is probably because you may not believe that that could ever happen to you or someone you love.

I don't EVER want my government to "disappear" anyone or cause them to be "suicided". I think that is supposed to be one of the reasons we are fighting wars and oppose tyrants that do those things... isn't it?

Anonymous said...

Think about the 50 million people killed in WW II and then tell me you wouldn't have agreed to suiciding Hitler in the 30's.

On a related but perhaps opposite side of that same arguement: It is likely that FDR allowed the attack on Pearl harbor that killed over 2000 people. His reason was that without the U.S. in the war Hitler would take England and the Japanese would take most of Southeast Asia and perhaps Australia. If he could get the American people behind him we could enter the war and ultimately save lives. Would you prefer that our government did something like this or simply suicided someone who would cause death and destruction?

Judy Aron said...

First off.. why do you not have the guts to put your name to your comments?

Secondly - I don't believe in "suiciding" anyone.. there is such a thing as a legal system.. and like it or not Hitler was elected to office (ironically on a platform of "Hope and Change"). When things started to go very badly many of his own people did not have the spine to stand up to his horrific policies. Therein lays the real problem. Hitler could not have done what he did alone.

As far as FDR and Pearl Harbor.. the conspiracy theories abound. Maybe he did - maybe he didn't.

Anyway - I would prefer that our government follow the rule of law.. and act decently. "Suiciding" people and "Disappearing" them are policies for despots and tyrants. Since you are ok with that though... how does that make you any different then people who supported Hitler?

Would you be ok with a government that "suicided" or "disappeared" a relative of yours - or even you - based on the government's simple thought that you (or they) were some sort of threat?