Here it is:
Atlanta, GA – “Seven years have passed since the horrid terrorist attacks of 9/11,” says Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party nominee for President. “The U.S. government can best mark the anniversary by continuing to target groups which threaten Americans, but also by respecting the liberties upon which our nation is based.”
“The Bush administration deserves credit for having done much to disable al Qaeda as an effective terrorist organization,” Barr says. “However, early on, the administration took its eye off of the ball when it shifted troops from searching for Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan to use in the unnecessary war in Iraq. Now, the situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating badly,” adds Barr.
“Moreover, the Bush administration engaged in a sustained attack on the liberty and privacy of Americans in the name of combating terrorism. It drafted the Patriot Act, which provided the federal government with powers well beyond those necessary to confront potential terrorists, and it initiated an illegal surveillance program of telephone calls and emails, ignoring both the Constitution and the law,” Barr explains.
“Obviously, the federal government has a responsibility to protect Americans from terrorist threats,” Barr notes. “However, equally fundamental is the government’s responsibility to respect the liberties which the federal government is tasked to protect. If we sacrifice those basic freedoms, then truly the terrorists have won,” Barr says.
“As president, I will focus U.S. law enforcement and military efforts on terrorists who have targeted Americans. I will not allow my administration to be sidetracked by unnecessary wars and interventions, such as in Iraq,” explains Barr. “As for Iraq, I will quickly withdraw U.S. troops, leaving Iraqis in control of their own destinies.”
“At home, I will restore the Constitution as the guide for U.S. policy,” insists Barr. “The government must combat those who wish Americans ill, but it must act within the law, ensuring accountability for U.S. officials. That means appropriate limits on and oversight of all surveillance, arrests, trials and imprisonment. Never can we forget that the American government is one of laws, not of men,” Barr concludes.
“The attacks of 9/11 leave us with great responsibility for the future. We must defend Americans from those outside who threaten violence. We also must defend Americans from those at home who would sacrifice our liberties,” says Barr.
My friend Angela Keaton splashed my wall on Facebook with a note about how the LNC had passed a resolution against the war in Afghanistan, but the staff would not put it on the LP.org web site nor would they issue a press release about it. I blog about it here:
http://bostontea.us/node/263
Note that the press release discussed in this page here on IPR is the same which I found on the lp.org web site, and which is directly at odds with the stated LNC policy position on Afghanistan.
Yes, GE, please join the Boston Tea Party. It badly needs more anarcho-capitalist purists in its ranks. I am sickened by the extent to which statists are involved in it. But, then, as you know, I’m only party chair until the convention elects someone in late October.
Do you have “evidence” of your and Barr’s claims about al Qaeda?
Because here’s one instance of what I’m talking about: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/magazine/07pakistan-t.html?_r=1&ref=magazine&oref=slogin
Here’s a quote from the article:
“Then there is Al Qaeda. According to American officials and counterterrorism experts, the organization has rebuilt itself and is using its sanctuaries inside the tribal areas to plan attacks against the United States and Europe. Since 2004, six major terrorist plots against Europe or the United States — including the successful suicide attacks in London that killed 52 people in July 2005 — have been traced back to Pakistan’s tribal areas, according to Bruce Hoffman, a professor of security studies at Georgetown University. Hoffman says he fears that Al Qaeda could be preparing a major attack before the American presidential election. “I’m convinced they are planning something,†he told me.”
G.E. // Sep 11, 2008 at 10:12 pm
“Anthony – The Boston Tea Party is too statist for me.”
The user posting under the pseudonym G.E. is really Woody Allen:
“I would never join a club that would have anyone like me as a member.”
He and this Milnes guy should get together, but they’d still only be able to form a party of one.
This is a great press release:
1st: It addresses by inference the fact that it was Bin Laden and AlQaeda behind the Sept 11, 2001 attacks. The crazy “truthers” hurt Ron Paul and the Libertarian movement a great deal when they latched on to Ron Paul’s campaign. Of course Ron is just too nice a guy to tell them how stupid they are, but he should have found a way. They made Ron look like a wacko, which he is NOT.
2nd: It recognizes that terrorism is indeed a problem and that there are terrorists that would attack Americans if they could. This is a real concern for millions of Americans, and we do have the right to defend ourselves against attackers.
True, the attackers may have been abused by America’s past foreign policy. It could indeed be “blowback” as 9/11 was. But, we still must defend ourselves, even against blowback. This was a point that Dr. Paul failed to make.
3rd: It goes on to explain how the Bush adm. has attacked the constitution and eroded our civil liberties and that if we give up our liberties at home to combate terror we have already lost to the terrorists.
Nothing in this press release deviates from Dr. Paul’s positions. It does, however, avoid the problems that Ron faced due to his crazy “truther” supporters on the one hand, and his inadvertent alienation of those in the general public who harbor genuine, legitimate fear of terrorism.
This is a very well done piece. It is purely LIBERTARIAN, and sensitive to the fears and concerns of real people.
Nice job.
The LP aims to beat the “Paulbots”? I thought the LP was supposed to like libertarians. Oh, wait…
G.E.
I question the motives and/or sanity of anyone promoting a “coalition” made up of a pair of personality cults, a theocratic fascist, and a marxist environmentalist.
The Libertarian Party does not form coalitions with such organizations. The Libertarian Party realizes those organizations have the right to exists, but realizes that we are fighting for the same votes. Good luck to the greens, the constitutionalists, the Paulbots and the Naderites, but the LP aims to beat those groups, not join them.
Anthony – The game of politics is played by making coalitions — KINDA LIKE THE F’ING CAMPAIGN FOR LIBERTY. We’re willing to make friends. The moderate statists and libertines are not.
G.E.-Well, at least you are honest about it. I have no problem with a purist, and I have no problem with anarchists, especially considering that philosophically, I am a free-market anarchist.
I do, however, have a problem with purists or anarchists who don’t understand how the game of politics is played, where compromise is the name of the game. On the political playing field, as long as the Libertarian Party is compromising toward liberty, then they are accomplishing their mission.
Some time ago, G.E., I went to the greyhound races. And you know what I noticed about the little mechanic rabbit (“Sparky”) that goes around the track, enticing the greyhounds to chase it? When the gates open and the dogs are free to run, Sparky is not at the end of the track, refusing to move, expecting the dogs to see him, see where he is, and understand where they must go.
Nope. Sparky is just in front of the dogs, enticing them to start running, and Sparky stays just in front of them the whole time, constantly prodding the dogs to keep running, always in sight, all the way to the finish line.
Thats the way the LP needs to operate. Not waiting at the finish line, refusing to move, expecting voters to come ALL the way to our position. Nope, we stand out just in front of them, reachable, attainable, and always moving towards the finish line. Before they know it, the voters might actually get there.
Anthony – The Boston Tea Party is too statist for me.
Maybe Barr just meant that Bush had cut funding to “Al Qaeda” and strongarmed Israel into doing the same. Ha.
Regardless, the last thing we need is MORE mythmaking about “Al-Qaeda” by saying “OMG it’s stronger than ever before” like “ex” CIA Michael Scheuer. That’s the kind of crap that Brzezinski and Obama are pushing so they can invade Pakistan.
Ross,
you have any evidence for your claim about Al Qaeda, or do you just like to see yourself type?
Al Qaeda’s doing better than ever! That doesn’t appeal to the average voter! And neither do Barr’s misleading statements?
I support the existence of the military, I’m no anarchist. However, I do not support praising George W. Bush, especially for things he did not do.
G.E.,
Go join the boston tea party, anarchist.
Uh, yeah. That’s what a LIBERTARIAN would say.
Go join the Dems, statist.
Besides being totally out of touch with the average voter (you know, the people we are supposed to be appealing to). you people are very selective listeners.
The statement “The Bush administration deserves credit for having done much to disable al Qaeda as an effective terrorist organization,†is likely a relatively accurate statement. This is WITHOUT REGARD to who created al Qaeda, why they exist, or which administration’s foreign policy is to blame (and doubtless all of you know that U.S. foreign policy misadventures started long before W. got into office.)
Secondly, Barr clearly states the Iraq War was a mistake that he would correct, excoriated Bush for his “sustained attack on the liberty and privacy of Americans” (another mistake he would correct), and supported the idea that one of the few jobs the federal government is Constitutionally mandated to execute is defense.
How is any of this “unLibertarian?” I suppose for some of you, you would only be happy if the LP nominee said, “Iraq was a mistake, Afghanistan was a mistake, WWII was a mistake, and if I am elected President, I would dismantle the military and turn defense over to privately-contracted defense corporations, which every American would be free to buy or not buy. Anarchy!!!”
Join us in the petition to remove Barr from the ballot: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/RemoveBobBar/index.html
It looks like Barr has done more to ally himself with Bush than perhaps even John McCain.
“The Bush administration deserves credit for having done much to disable al Qaeda as an effective terrorist organization.”
What? No. Just no. Bush deserves shame, for his foreign policy has strengthened the terrorists and inspired hatred towards America and (more importantly) towards Americans.
“The Bush administration deserves credit for having done much to disable al Qaeda as an effective terrorist organization.â€
That’s insane.
al Qaeda was formed by the CIA in the 1980s to fight the Russians.
“The Bush administration deserves credit for having done much to disable al Qaeda as an effective terrorist organization.”
REMOVE BARR NOW
Yeah, too much pandering on the Al-Qaeda thing, even though he’s still careful not to expicitly say that Al-Qaeda had anything to do with 9/11.
9/11 was carried out by the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld (the axis of evil).
This press release makes no sense.