[Hugh the Scot]

It’s a false dichotomy. There is no reason to believe that more buildings must be blown up to ensure our liberty.
That argument presupposes that there are no alternative solutions to the security question. It also presupposes that monitoring my text messages and phone calls enhances national security in any way. It doesn’t.
I’d be willing to try a different approach: Since the Islamists have openly stated that we are their enemy, and that they want to kill us; let’s take them at their word. Stop the PC nonsense and name our enemy. I’ll wager that if 10% of the money spent on wiretapping Americans unconstitutionally had been spent on actually destroying the ememies ability to attack us, or securing our own borders, we wouldn’t need to have a conversation on liberty vs. security at all.

[hummingbird]

"I’d be willing to try a different approach: Since the Islamists have openly stated that we are their enemy, and that they want to kill us; let’s take them at their word. Stop the PC nonsense and name our enemy. I’ll wager that if 10% of the money spent on wiretapping Americans unconstitutionally had been spent on actually destroying the enemies ability to attack us, or securing our own borders, we wouldn’t need to have a conversation on liberty vs. security at all."

Intelligent approach. So much that you must not be a government employee.

[subterfuge]

“Can”t let a crisis go to waste.”

[cymbeline]

“Since the Islamists have openly stated that we are their enemy ...”

Not all of them. I wonder how many of them. A tenth? Half? Most? How many are our enemy but would never admit it?

Your post makes some good points.

[af_vet_rr]

I’d be willing to try a different approach: Since the Islamists have openly stated that we are their enemy, and that they want to kill us; let’s take them at their word. Stop the PC nonsense and name our enemy. I’ll wager that if 10% of the money spent on wiretapping Americans unconstitutionally had been spent on actually destroying the ememies ability to attack us, or securing our own borders, we wouldn’t need to have a conversation on liberty vs. security at all.

I wouldn't take that wager, because you would in.

Furthermore, Bush, and Obama, don't want to offend their Muslim buddies, so they decide we are going to wage a war on terrorism, which is a concept, instead of naming our actual enemies, as you pointed out. That means we get a war that will literally never end, which pleases the defense contractors and their lobbyists, and it pleases the statists like Christie who get to use it as a means of taking our freedom away from us.