Watch This One Closely!
As the investigation in the wake of the Oklahoma bombing continues, concerns regarding the abuse of powers by the FBI and other organizations are being answered with the assurances that the government, and its agents, are acting "in good faith." While this is certainly nice to hear, it should not assuage fears of abuse, as the following arguments will show. The current media coverage of the event has generally played to the fears of a nation unused to terrorist activity, and has presented an overwhelmingly positive impression of the investigators. As part of this positive depiction, those who have endeavored to criticise the actions of those involved in the investigation have been characterized as "paranoids" and "conspiracy theorists." However, it is my belief that we should be skeptical of these claims, as there are very good reasons to expect that abuses of power will occur during the course of this investigation, abuses that are likely to occur whether or not the agents involved act in "good faith" and which do not require the creation of any conspiracies to support. What follows are a few probably abuses, with a brief explanation in each case of why it is likely to come about. While much more reasoned critique of government actions is needed, it is hoped that this will provide a starting point to get people thinking.
1. Fabrication of evidence, trumped up charges, and the like are almost certain to occur. This is obvious, given some thought. Despite the fact that government agents may indeed be concerned for justice, they are currently in a situation in which they will accrue huge awards for finding viable suspects with little or no penalty for fingering innocent individuals. In such a situation, it is unreasonable to expect that these agents, who are, after all, human beings, will use their best judgment when dealing with potential suspects. Errors of omission and distortion are very likely to occur, and those errors are unlikely to be noticed amidst the drive to find the guilty parties. The result? Innocent people will be detained, jailed, or, in extreme cases, injured or killed.
2. In the event that those responsible for the Oklahoma bombing are connected with the federal government, it is unlikely that they will ever be found. Once again, let us proceed given the expectation that everyone involved is acting on "good faith." Even if this is so, these are government employees, generally quite loyal to their employer, and, thus, they are unlikely to suspect government involvement in the bombing. While this is not to say that these individuals would not be harshly dealt with in the event that they were proven to be responsible for the bombing, it _is_ arguable that government agents would have a difficult time believing that one of their own could do such a thing. Thus, if there _is_ government involvement, the agents doing the investigating are unlikely to uncover it.
3. Those who do not agree with the views of the federal government for whatever reason are almost certain to be discriminated against in the course of the investigation. This is, I should think, obvious given the current wide-ranging investigation of protest groups with no apparent connection to the Oklahoma incident. Once again, even honest agents are far more likely to expect unsavory behavior on the part of those who object to government policies, leading to a consistent bias against these individuals.
4. Political reactions to the bombing are likely to result in legislation which will infringe upon civil liberties without preventing terrorism. Whenever a major crisis occurs, an angry electorate encourages politicians to "do something" about it, whether or not that something is a reasoned action. In the case of the Oklahoma bombing, numerous peaceful protest groups may have their constitutional rights to free speech and to be free of politically motivated search and seizure due to a knee-jerk reaction from Congress and the White House. Experts agree that, had the FBI been allowed to monitor protest groups, it is unlikely that the Oklahoma bombing could have been prevented. So-called "monitoring" has, in the past, become politically motivated harassment and was specifically outlawed because of the government's use of "monitoring" to attack peaceful anti-war protestors. While the Oklahoma bombing was a great tragedy, nothing is to be gained by irrational action. It is now more essential than ever to pay attention to governmental activities and to exercise a healthy degree of skepticism towards claims made by the federal government and its apologists.
Larry-