QUESTION TO THE MEDIA
is the Bill of Rights "anti-government" too?

BY Dorothy Anne Seese
9/8/01

This is a general question to those reporters and editorialists who love to
toss around the phrase "anti-government" when citizens or citizens groups
challenge their individual, property or other rights when a government
agency takes action.


The Bill of Rights states what powers and rights belong to the people, upon
which the government may not trespass.  Does that make the Bill of Rights
"anti-government?"


If not, why not?


Why is it that individuals and groups who assert their rights under the
Bill of Rights become "anti-government"?  The Bill of Rights gives to us,
as citizens, certain rights upon which the government may not infringe, and
when we assert those rights, you, the media, immediately attach to us the
label "anti-government."


If the Bill of Rights gives us our rights, and it is still the law of the
land, then are you guilty of libel when you label people who invoke such
rights as "anti-government"?  Maybe that's one that should be tested in a
court of law.  You're banking on the lack of funding behind people's groups
to keep them out of a court of law in such tests, or you, the media, would
not be so careless about the invective with which you label people who
merely stand up for what our founding fathers gave us to protect us from
government oppression.


You use your First Amendment rights of freedom of the press.  If some of us
use our right of freedom of speech, we're "anti-government."


Dual standard for the fourth estate versus the common man?  Or it is just
that you, the liberal media, are so bent on taking our Bill of Rights away
from us that short of labeling the Bill of Rights itself as
"anti-government" you attach the label to those of us who dare ....  dare
...  to defend our rights against government intrusion?


Do you, the media, realize that fully two-thirds of the laws now on the
books in the United States would likely be declared unconstitutional if put
to the test by a fair and just Supreme Court?
That if we had elected constitutionally-conscious representatives as our
lawmakers, such laws would not be laws today?


Or is that an anti-government question?


Your freedom of the press is abused by your use of it to intimidate, label,
libel and malign United States citizens who invoke their constitutional
rights.  Pravda could do no better, and Xinhua, the state-controlled
Chinese press, could do no worse!


Is it any wonder that thinking Americans are turning to certain cable
networks in the hope of obtaining honest information rather than biased
reporting?


Is it any wonder that newspaper circulation is dropping like a rock while
internet news thrives?


We not only need an honest government in this nation, we need an honest
national media system, and if we had the latter, we might have the former!


Now take the above and shove it down your anti-constitutional presses and
think before you write or blather on the airwaves.


I just exercised my First Amendment right of freedom of speech.


*** Contributor Dorothy Anne Seese is committed to defending our founders
vision of liberty in America. Visit her website  The Flagship Log or e-mail
Dottie at lightspd@extremezone.com.
http://www.tech.com.au/flagship/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in
this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to
those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for
non-profit research and educational purposes only.   [Ref.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml]