BCT Editorial – 1/4/06

This page was last updated on January 4, 2006.

History lesson; Editorial; Beaver County Times; January 4, 2006.

I wonder why the editorial’s “history lesson” about civil liberties didn’t mention FDR imprisoning over 100,000 American residents – most of whom were U.S. citizens – during World War II just because they were of Japanese or German descent. The editorial also didn’t mention that government agents read letters from WWII servicemen to the U.S. so “sensitive” material could be censored.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“A look at the recent past shows why it is important to protect civil liberties

“If you want to know why it is so important that the United States have a Patriot Act that protects civil liberties, all you have to do is turn back the clock to less than 100 years ago.”

[RWC] That’s right. You only need to go back to 1942-1946.

Regarding the Patriot Act, the original had protections and the version recently defeated by Democrat and RINO senators added even more.

“Not content with the Espionage Act that Congress passed in 1917 upon the nation’s entry into World War I, the super-nationalists in Montana upped the ante in 1918 by passing their own sedition law, which was enforced with a vengeance.

“The Chicago Tribune reports that 74 Montanans were convicted and sent to prison under the law. While some may have suggested violence, all most of them really did was speak their minds, saying something that offended sensitivities of the powers that be.”

[RWC] “Some may have suggested violence?” Here’s a quote from the Tribune article the editorial author chose not to disclose.

“Ed Horn: ‘The heads of the government at the White House ought to be killed and then the war would stop.’”

Lest we forget, we’ve had some lefty wackos make the same statement about President Bush.

“Here are some of the unpatriotic utterances that landed them in jail:

“* ‘These damn fools still think they can lick Germany, but all they get is a good licking in France every day.’”

[RWC] Gee, I didn’t know Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) was that old! <g>

“* ‘I would sooner fight for the Kaiser than I would for the United States.’

“* ‘Americans are no good, and I hope that Germany will win.’

“* Albert Brooks: ‘Let those who own the country do the fighting! Put the wealthiest in the front ranks; the middle class next; follow these with judges, lawyers, preachers and politicians.’

“* Frank McVey: ‘I do not see why we should be fighting the Kaiser, and I don’t see why people should go crazy over patriotism. The Kaiser and his government is better than the U.S.A.’

[RWC] I can see why the editorial used these examples. Change “Germany” to “Afghanistan/Iraq” and “the Kaiser” for “Saddam Hussein” and these alleged quotes represent the position of the leadership of today’s Democrats and liberals/progressives.

“Even criticism of the Red Cross could land you in the clink. A woman was convicted after witnesses said she declared the Red Cross a ‘fake,’ and that ‘while she didn’t mind helping the Belgians with the relief work, the trouble was that the damned soldiers would get it.’

“The damage done to freedom and liberty wasn’t limited to Montana. The Tribune reported that three months after Montana enacted its law, Congress passed a national sedition law, ‘largely due to the influence of Montana politicians and legislative leaders.’

“Except for three words, the federal law was a copy of Montana’s law. About 2,000 men and women would be convicted under the national Espionage and Sedition Acts, including Eugene V. Debs, who organized the American Railway Union, the nation’s first industrial union, in Chicago, the paper reported.”

[RWC] In its history lesson, the editorial failed to note a primary motivator of these laws was a fear that communism would overtake the U.S. as was happening in Russia. Mr. Debs was also founder of the U.S. Socialist Party.

None of this excuses the subject laws.

“Keep the Montana sedition law and the mentality behind it in mind when Congress takes up the renewal of the Patriot Act in February. If studying the past teaches us anything, it is that history all too often repeats itself.”

[RWC] This is really sad. For whatever reason, the Times wants us to believe the Patriot Act is a modern day version of the subject espionage and sedition acts.

Perhaps the Times someday can tell us why the above quotes would not qualify as so-called “hate speech.” I don’t know the Times position on hate speech, but people with political and social positions (read: left) similar to those of the Times tend to believe hate speech should be punished. I guess it’s only hate speech when liberals say it is.