"Freedom and Human Rights in America are Doomed"

Status
Not open for further replies.

Flyboy

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2004
Messages
1,888
Location
Oklahoma City, OK
Walter Williams weighs in on liberty vs. the appearance of security:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/walterwilliams/ww20050824.shtml
Driving through downtown Washington, D.C., a few weeks ago, I asked myself: What's happened to the character of the American people? There were barricaded landmarks, armed guards and people waiting to be searched. Several weeks ago, I visited downtown Philadelphia in the vicinity of Independence Hall. Again there were barricades, armed guards and visitors waiting in line.

During the 1940s, my cousin and I, carrying our shoeshine boxes, simply walked in and stood before the room where the Declaration of Independence was adopted and the U.S. Constitution was signed. The only barrier was a velvet-covered rope. Much of today's security measures are little more than a panicked response to terrorism and not likely to ever go away because Americans are coming to accept it as normal.

Melanie Scarborough's article "The Security Pretext," in the Washington, D.C.-based Cato Institute's Briefing Papers (June 29, 2005), argues that Americans haven't always panicked in the face of attack. British troops burned the White House in 1814. Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor in 1941. In more recent times, the Statue of Liberty has been taken over by Puerto Rican nationalists, Attica Brigade, and Vietnam Veterans Against the War (twice). The Black Liberation Front attempted to blow up the statue in 1964. Since 1915, bombs have been detonated in the Capitol three times with no injuries or structural catastrophe. Scarborough writes, "Terrorists have already hit our national monuments. The difference is that after those attacks, the government did not respond with hysteria."

In an October 2001 interview, Osama bin Laden boasted, "I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The United States government will lead the American people into an unbearable hell and a choking life." Government security measures haven't yet produced an "unbearable hell and a choking life," but with all the emerging restrictions on our liberty, we can safely say we're headed in that direction. The late Sen. Patrick Moynihan warned, "Terrorism succeeds when people become terrified."

Scarborough says the war against terrorism is in large part a war against fear. To win, three things are critically needed. First, Americans must realize that we cannot produce, nor would most Americans want, an environment that is totally free from the risk of terrorist attack. Second, improving security is important, but we must weigh the costs against the benefits of each measure. A minor example: Engineers have testified that the Washington Monument, with its 15-foot thick walls, is virtually immune to destruction by hand-carried bombs. Therefore, how wise is it to spend millions protecting it against hand-carried bombs?

Third, it's essential that our leaders exhibit courage. During the Cold War days of 1963, when President Kennedy was assassinated, some in the administration thought it was the start of a coup. If that were the case, Lyndon Johnson would be the next target. But when Mrs. Kennedy said she intended to walk from the White House to the funeral, President Johnson helped lead the procession that marched through the streets of downtown Washington.

During last week's commemoration of V-J day, I thought about American responses to loss of life in Iraq compared to yesteryear's American response to loss of life in the Pacific. Taking Iwo Jima cost 7,000 American lives and thousands wounded. Okinawa cost the lives of 5,000 sailors, 7,600 soldiers and thousands more wounded. There were no calls to cut and run and no political attacks on Presidents Roosevelt and Truman. Instead, those losses stiffened the backbone and resolve of the American people. But of course, back then, common sense prevailed. We hadn't become feminized and turned into a nation of wimps and nervous Nellies.

I'd like to see our political leaders adopt the character of their predecessors and say that we're not going to sacrifice liberties and cower in the face of our new enemy; we're going to kill him.
 
I haven't noticed anybody panicing. I have noticed our elected officials using the situation as a pretext for all sorts of offensive measures, and the public exibiting entirely too much resignation concerning them, but panic? Haven't seen a bit of it. People got more panicked over the calender rolling over.
 
Which reminds me...

Which one of our Founding Fathers said -- and I'm paraphrasing here -- "A nation willing to sacrifice it's liberty for security is not worthy of being called a nation?"

Led :cool:
 
I was particularly hoping that somebody would comment on this paragraph:
In an October 2001 interview, Osama bin Laden boasted, "I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The United States government will lead the American people into an unbearable hell and a choking life." Government security measures haven't yet produced an "unbearable hell and a choking life," but with all the emerging restrictions on our liberty, we can safely say we're headed in that direction. The late Sen. Patrick Moynihan warned, "Terrorism succeeds when people become terrified."
I have to say, it's pretty much right on the mark.
 
Hmmm. Maybe things have changed in Washington, but my life in the Dallas area has not changed at all.
 
In all fairness, Walter, there is no equivalence between WWII and the Iraq 'war'. Without going off on a tangent, suffice it to say Germany & Japan presented real threats to our security, and the American people pulled together.

That said™, it's my opinion that the current fervor to trade freedom for imagined security can be laid directly at the feet of the leftist/liberal/statists who've dominated this society for the last 40 years. These socialists have encouraged a constituency of dependence by way of victimization. They've sold the 'unwashed masses' on the notion that only government can provide their wants, needs, and desires. It's no wonder the brainwashed population mindlessy go along with the program.
 
This is a sad commentary on today's society. I suspect in the old days many people took care of things themselves. Family, community and similar organizations did much of what the government did. When the government caused the economic slowdown of the 30's these organizations were overwhelmed. The focus shifted to having the goverenment provide these services.
Today, when something happens instead of the people deciding to take action themselves, they expect the nanny government to solve all the problem. Politicians are more than willing, why because people like power.
What we need to do is to stand up and take responsiblity for our own lifes.
 
I'm with your dpesec... The sooner we become a society of responsible citizens again, the sooner we can return to a society free from government intervention...

I'm so sick of all this "the government knows best" crap that keeps coming down... The government cannot protect you....
 
1984's just running a little behind schedule is all. But have no fear -- Big Bro's doing his absolute best to..."protect us" from all those nasty, evil terrorists. So, why don't we all just relax and let "our" benevolent sellouts do what's best for us -- gradually usurp what's left of our freedoms...

I mean, it's all for our benefit in the long run...right? :rolleyes:
 
During last week's commemoration of V-J day, I thought about American responses to loss of life in Iraq compared to yesteryear's American response to loss of life in the Pacific. Taking Iwo Jima cost 7,000 American lives and thousands wounded. Okinawa cost the lives of 5,000 sailors, 7,600 soldiers and thousands more wounded. There were no calls to cut and run and no political attacks on Presidents Roosevelt and Truman. Instead, those losses stiffened the backbone and resolve of the American people. But of course, back then, common sense prevailed. We hadn't become feminized and turned into a nation of wimps and nervous Nellies.

If we had evidence that Iraq was behind 9/11, in the same way that Japan was behind Pearl Harbor, none of the problems we have would occur. I haven't heard of any major protests to our presence in Afghanistan, despite the fact that we're still there and doing our best to rebuild their nation.

Common sense still prevails. At least outside the White House.
 
Maybe, just maybe, Dubya "let" 9/11 happen for the same reason FDR let Pearl Harbor happen -- to get us involved in a war that the American public was dead-set against.

IMHO, anyone who believes ONE solitary word coming out of the mouths of "our" political leaders -- regardless of what they're babbling about -- needs to have his head examined. :banghead:
 
Much of today's security measures are little more than a panicked response to terrorism and not likely to ever go away because Americans are coming to accept it as normal.

I don't think they're a panicked response. I think the attacks of September 11, 2001 were excuses to take bites out of the nation's civil rights. Panic was just a rhetorical justification.

If we had evidence that Iraq was behind 9/11, in the same way that Japan was behind Pearl Harbor, none of the problems we have would occur.

Sure, they would. Leftist extremists never have much trouble concocting excuses to yell and scream and hop up and down and make great public fools of themselves.
 
“Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
Daniel Webster
 
but my life in the Dallas area has not changed at all.

Same old, same old, at DFW security? I don't think so. Pre-9/11/01, we could get on the plane with a knife and lighter in our pocket, because we were trusted with such things.

Germany & Japan presented real threats to our security

The Jihadists present a real threat, if they can get their hooks into the entire oil-producing region, turning it into a 14th century Taliban area. Then they turn off the spigot and let economies collapse. It's a world war, but the Jihadists are the only ones that view it that way.


Regards.
 
Flyboy, when I read the article that jumped right out at me. To repeat the scary part:

In an October 2001 interview, Osama bin Laden boasted, "I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The United States government will lead the American people into an unbearable hell and a choking life."

I've got to admit that our free way of life is being eroded by anti-terror laws. But I don't think we are doomed. Enough people can see through the smoke and there is some positive progress. Witness homeland security's latest admission that they need to secure the borders. Now it seems clear that the statement was a reaction to public pressure instead of some sudden observation of the obvious, but it's also clear that public pressure works. So I'm nowhere near ready to surrender to OBL.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top