Re: The Morals of Marches

From: Dennis Lapcewich 
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 16:47:50 +0900
Subject: Re: The Morals of Marches

At 07:00 AM 3/18/97 -0500, you wrote:
>(From a.c.a51...  -Ken)
>
>========================
>
>
>I've been keeping up with this net opera about how a bunch of folks are
>going to 'March on Area 51' in the name of Freedom of information.  It
>seems like a valiant move to make the US government to open up.   But
>there are just a few (heh) things.

<Big Snip>

>Neither you, me, anyone from a foreign nation, or any unauthorized
>personell have the right to cross that line.  You don't have a right to
>know what's in a secret military test facility.  You don't have the
>clearence.  You don't have the authority, you simply don't have that
>right.  Freedom of Speech is NOT extended to the nation...only the press.

<snip>

Lest my five active years researching and teaching the Constitution of the
United States in the very rooms where the document was debated, argued and
signed are incorrect and inaccurate, freedom of speech under the First
Amendment, as with any other amendment and the document itself, is an
agreement between the individuals, singularly or collectively, and their
government created by said document.  If one person, or a thousand, wish to
exercise their rights under the Constitution, so be it.  As stated in
numerous free speech cases, freedom of speech is not absolute.  Any first
year journalism student can tell you that.  Whether the thousand marchers
succeed (undefined) remains to be seen. Their individual, or collective,
right to march, however, is a right nevertheless.

The original writer of this piece seems confused between rights and
responsibilities, as practiced by the citizenry and by their government.
As a citizen under said document, currently living abroad, may I suggest
such "flag wavers" of mom, pop, and apple pie take two steps back, shut up
and observe their surroundings for a while.  Maybe not from 10,000 miles
away, but it doesn't hurt.  The perspective gained is immense.

Living in a country where there are practically *no* guaranteed freedoms
brings forth all sorts of feelings from this perspective.  Speculation that
much of the alleged Area 51 alien artifacts may have been moved to
Australia (Pine Gap?) carries some weight, especially when you consider the
location is more remote, harder to get to, easier to hide, and in a country
where the local population is ignorant (by apparent deliberate government
design, alleged media "cooperation" with government, and societal
indifference to "getting involved" as practiced in the US) of what their
government may be doing to assist another friendly government.

That and the recent issue raised on a network tv program here that former
Prime Minister Whitlam's demise twenty plus years ago by then Governor
General Kerr was more concerned with Whitlam's threat to expose in
Parliament Pine Gap as a CIA base and Area 51 repository THE VERY AFTERNOON
OF HIS DISMISSAL,  than internal political squabbling over supply.  This
Australian constitutional crisis is well-researched and taught in schools,
but this tv program was the first time I ever heard of a CIA/Area 51
connection.   Needless to say, nothing more on this connection has
resurfaced in the Australian press, probably because the revelation was
made in an evening tv program concerned with conspiracies, Area 51, etc.
(yes, Glenn, you were in it!).

Whether the march on Area 51 makes any impact remains to be seen.  A
similar march is almost impossible here, for the reasons mentioned above.

I would appreciate my return address be left out of the Area 51
redistribution, not so much for me as my employer.  They get skittish when
I exercise my first amendment rights.

DL