COLUMN: Does Bush really love freedom?

There’s a story floating around the Internet that claims President George W. Bush called the U.S. Constitution “just a goddamned piece of paper” during a meeting with Republican congressional leaders last month in the Oval Office. As I can’t find a single credible news source that verifies this story, I’m going to write it off as leftist nonsense. But at the same time, I can’t shake a feeling that, even if there isn’t any truth to the story, there’s an unsettling element of believability.

Following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Bush was quick to provide a motive for these terrorist actions: “They hate our freedoms – our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.”

Since then, the administration’s unilateral “war on terror” has ostensibly been dedicated to protecting the freedoms guaranteed to us by the Constitution. Recent events, however, have cast a shadow of doubt on the Bush administration’s intentions.

First, Bush has admitted to having “authorized the interception of international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations … I’ve reauthorized this program more than 30 times since the September the 11th attacks, and I intend to do so for so long as our nation is – for so long as the nation faces the continuing threat of an enemy that wants to kill American citizens.”

While government wiretapping of calls from people with alleged links to al Qaeda probably isn’t too shocking to anyone at this point, these particular instances are of significance for two reasons.

No. 1: We’re dealing with the invasion of privacy (phone calls, conversations, e-mails) of American citizens.

No. 2: The president authorized these wiretaps without first obtaining a warrant.

Bush cited Article II of the Constitution as the legal justification for bypassing Congress, but Article II provides no support for his actions. However, Amendment IV does provide some insight into the illegality of these wiretaps:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

To make matters worse, according to a memo released Dec. 23, Bush’s Supreme Court nominee, Sam Alito, backed immunity in 1984 for a Nixon-era official accused of illegal wiretapping. With Alito breezing through his confirmation hearings so far, Bush will have an easier time getting favorable decisions from the high court.

The second point of concern for me is the questionable imprisonment of Jose Padilla. Captured in May 2002 at a Chicago airport, Padilla was accused of being a “dirty bomber” and has been held as an “enemy combatant” ever since. While I don’t have nearly enough information to come to a reasonable conclusion concerning Padilla’s guilt or innocence, I do know that he is an American citizen who was held for more than three years without being charged of a crime.

The Constitution is clear that a man’s liberty cannot be taken away without due process of law. Habeas corpus, the right to know why you’re being imprisoned, is clearly defined.

In November, after Padilla challenged the legality of his imprisonment, the Bush administration finally charged Padilla with “conspiracy to murder, kidnap and maim individuals overseas, and providing material support to terrorists as part of a North American terrorist support cell.” While these are serious crimes, they are far from the original allegations that kept Padilla locked up for more than three years. I would assume this is due to the fact that it is harder to actually prove something than it is to merely say something is so during a press conference.

Both the wiretaps and the imprisonment of Padilla are unconstitutional. They are clear violations of the freedoms Bush says these terrorists hate.

I’m just starting to worry that Bush might hate them more.

Aaron Falk is the news editor for the Utah Statesman and a senior in print journalism. Comments can be sent to acf@cc.usu.edu.