"Patriotic" security

There is a word in every language, "patriot", whose meaning is often confiscated by the people serving a certain interest.
Under this word’s protection, it is well known, one can acquire a bigger freedom of action, with no fear someone could ask him further explanations. It provokes paralysis, it provides morphine. It is for free and on immediate delivery. It is a word after which here at us, for instance, some politicians’ careers are still judged and washed clean.
The most recent example is the PDSR (Social Democracy Party) Deputy Ristea Priboi, appointed president of the Parliamentarian Commission for the Control of the SIE activity. Before 1989, the former employee in the external informative structure of Securitate for activities specific to the political police became even the deputy of the chief of service "Free Europe", subordinate to General Plesita. He was the one that represented, as we know, the starting point of the attempts against the radio channel "Free Europe" and the death threatens against the Romanian intellectuals in the diaspora. Priboi’s action was particularly directed against the ones that expressed critic opinions against Ceausescu regime. People that didn’t undertake spying actions, didn’t strike in the economic interests of the regime, but in the ideological ones.
It was not an exceptional case, among the majority of the Securitate employees, the fact that by 1997 Priboi changed, like a real professional, several functions. Than he became a favorite of Adrian Nastase, whom he probably knew even before 1989. On a false oath, that he was not a collaborator of Securitate, he entered the Parliament by the front door. The juridical clause, the false oath, is a different subject.
But the moral clause – on the basis of which he was validated and proposed by PDSR for the function – needs a particular debate. Denying all these activities, brought out cleaned and washed by the juridical dribbling of the Constitution’s "father", Antonie Iorgovan, PDSR gives us now the version of the patriotism. Priboi is presented as a poor officer in the State’ service, which only tried to serve the country’s interests. PDSR is also the one responsible for the nuances.
What was this DIE officer defending, in his glory time, that we can call him a patriot? The human rights? The expression freedom in Romania? Were his interests accorded to the citizens’ interests? Impossible.
He did nothing but defend Ceausescu’s communist oligarchy. Could we call a patriot a server of a totalitarian state? PDSR’s answer is yes, as the existence of the state is, in its opinion, more important than the individual’s welfare or freedom. To be a patriot in PDSR’s standpoint is to be sworn in to a supra-individual reality, not to the citizens’ interests. The PDSR’ s and PRM’ s success, the two parties that officially and deliberately use the former employees of Securitate, is the public reparation and renaming with the innocent formula "patriot" of some former torturers. As Nastase says, "what’s with all these obsession?"
(Mihai CHIPER)

Publicitate și alte recomandări video