-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Okay, here's a synopsis; He starts with the premise that after
Sept. 11 'everything changed', and that safety needs now will start
to trump all personal liberties. He goes on to describe before and
after scenes from different parts of society:
Before: We cared about medical records privacy
After: Today, security 'needs' trump all privacy 'rights'
Before: Americans demanded better, faster, cheaper air service
After: 'No one complains, even silently, about exposing dirty
underwear in a public place' (direct quote referring to hand checks
of luggage at airports)
Before: Face scanning technology is a frightening invasion of our
privacy
After: These technologies are 'comforting' today
Before: NAFTA is good for the economy, and open trade leads the way
to economic prosperity
After: Fortifying the border with Canada is an utmost priority
Before: Privatization of airport security makes economic and business
sense
After: Trust in central government is unquestioned and total.
Federalizing airport security is a requirement.
Here's his closing paragraph:
- -------------------
The lasting impact of Sept. 11 is likely to be greatest on Americans
in their late teens and early 20s, "the people who are still young
enough to have their values being formed," Mr. Bulin suggests. For
them, Sept. 11 will likely prove as important in shaping attitudes
and behavior as the traumatic Kennedy assassination and the divisive
Vietnam War were for an earlier generation. And it is truly
impossible to predict just how that will show itself in the decades
ahead.
- -------------------
Hopefully he's right; but not in the way that he intended. It
was a chilling article on how to roll over and reliquish liberties
and rights fought and died for over hundreds of years, all in the
name of safety. It was almost a treatise to crawl back into the womb
of your 'mother', and leave all the nasty work to the government,
who'll take care of you.
It's hard to believe that the authors feelings are different from
those expressed in the article, but as it was on the front page of
the WSJ and not the editorial page, perhaps he was just reporting on
what he was seeing in the US and not personalizing it.
It's hard to live in a world with freedom, liberty, and personal
responsibility. It's much easier to just relinquish control to a
higher power and accept what fate comes to you. But that's not the
spirit that made this country great, and it's not the attitude that
will pull the US out of this jamb.
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Trei, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Peter Capelli'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 11:21 AM
Subject: RE: How-to be a sheep article on the WSJ
> For those of us who aren't signed up, can you
> give a summary?
>
> Peter Trei
>
>
> > ----------
> > From: Peter Capelli[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> >
> > Subscription required; i couldnt find it on their free
> > opinionjournal site, where it should have been. At first I
> > thought
> > it was satire, but after reading it twice realized it wasn't.
> >
> > http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB1002146366879715800.htm
> >
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.2
iQA/AwUBO7yIcWt0HGKCkmO2EQL5JgCgymf3J8nU2OkuC81oMCV8xlxM79EAoJ1z
KvKxcjNPnqEWhSNr8sHsM4dS
=8L5L
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
