American liberty, American individualism.

Government Threatened Foley Family Over Ransom Payments, Mother of Slain Journalist Says

Her claim has been confirmed by others.

So.

Pretty much always the interests of law enforcement and government on the one side and those of victims, witnesses, or victims' families on the other are opposed.

Given the chance, governments will and in some cases have made it a criminal offense for such folks to act in their own interests, contrary to those of the government.

Government can and will always argue it represents "the greater good," or anyway the interests of prospective future victims and their families, loved ones, etc.

But unless we are prepared to allow government to pursue its ends "by any means necessary" we have to insist both that government act only within the law and that the law protect at least some of the very people and interests government would sacrifice, if wholly free.

Unless we are to surrender liberty and the individual to universal serfdom and the hive, unless we are to abandon individualism to collectivism, we cannot allow government such power.

[Aside:

And when you come right down to it, this is all the more necessary as always and everywhere government for each of those governed criminalizes some conduct he cannot or will not entirely eschew and for which he insists on escaping punishment - or demands conduct he prefers to avoid, also escaping punishment.

The whole issue of privacy comes in here, touching everything from the Fourth Amendment and the NSA to Zamiatin's walls made of glass and the child spies of 1984.

But that, of course, speaks to the interests of us all as lawbreakers, or anyway defiers of convention, which is not the issue here.

/Aside]

As to the present matter, so far as I know, it is neither illegal nor unusual for the families of kidnap victims to pay ransom, and that is as I would prefer.

About this particular incident, I would also prefer to see those officials responsible for terrorizing the family of the kidnapped journalist jailed for a bit of serious time, though I expect nothing of the kind.

Arguably, they cost the fellow his life.

But it is only too likely this revolting and tyrannical behavior represents the attitude of the administration all the way to the top, including O.

Recall their contempt for the constitutional and legal rights of that fellow who put on the Internet a video critical of Mohammed, upon which they deceptively blamed the Benghazi incident.

Recall their contempt for the rights of the Protestant Minister who repeatedly publicly planned a bonfire of Korans.

And recall that in both cases their contempt was shared by a very large number of high ranking public figures of both parties who publicly demanded, very high on their moral horses indeed, punishment of people who had acted, or had merely planned to act, entirely lawfully.