The U.S. office of homeland security. Immune to the whistleblower protections, FOIA, Habeas Corpus [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus], congressional overview, and any other kind of due process. Watch what you say, watch who you talk to, watch where you surf online - you better watch out, because they're watching you. And if they don't like what they see, you just disappear.

Does the WarOnTerrorism justify a SecretPolice, or are the SecretPolice an instrument of terror?

* No. Nothing justifies a SecretPolice.
* The only thing a SecretPolice ''can'' be is an instrument of terror.

The premise that "anyone ''can'' be a terrorist, so you must watch ''everyone''" is almost too broken for comment.

The only remedy for this is to remain as open and transparent as possible. All attempts at security through secrecy and "special" powers lead to tyranny.

Please note that this does not say openness and transparency are easy. Even a little bit. But anything else loses.
---------
The war on terror is scary

----
CIA, FBI, MI5/6 and various other political/military/financial groups. What's one more? -- DominicBurns

''You forgot Al Qaeda in that list.'' -- PhlIp
----
Oh the drama!  The intrigue!

''Oh, the humanity!''

Oh the untruth, and the mistatements made equating a legally constituted, open and regulated agency with Secret''''''Police. 

Open and regulated?  That's funny.  And what's legally constituted got to do with it?  Most Secret Polices are legally constituted.  JasonGrossman
----
CategoryOffTopic