The Neocon War on Peace and Freedom, Part 1

Future of Freedom Foundation ^ | 18 Feb. 04 | James Bovard

[Dalan]

"I oppose national ID because I have this strange penchant for privacy and freedom."

And just how much privacy and freedom do you think we'll have when we're living under Islamic Shari'a law, hmmm?

You response is just so much hot air. Care to go a little deeper? I'll ask you the same the question I posed to steve b:

Now, let's see if you can answer without a dodge: do you have an alternative, besides denial of the problem?

"I realise that's rare and outdated, especially around here."

What a load. The name of this site is Free Republic! Virtually everything on this site is about freedom! Freedom to not be slaughtered or subjugated by Islamic cultists. Freedom from punative, confiscatory taxation and socialist income redistribution. Freedom to not have our children indoctrinated by sexual deviants in our public schools. Freedom to not have our country's sovereignty and security sold out to unelected Eurocrats who are operating in their own best interests, not ours.

[u-89]

War is peace. Slavery is freedom. Shut up and salute!

[MarkDel]

U-89,

Ok, let me try another way to explain to you why you are misguided even if your intentions are good.

Let's say that you are an extreme Christian Scientist and you believe that all forms of non-holistic medicine are wrong. You are diagnosed with a serious case of cancer that requires not only surgery, but long term chemotherapy. You now have two options:

1. Stand behind your beliefs...and die.
2. Take the radical steps of surgery and chemotherapy and perhaps save your life.

Well, this analogy is PERFECT for what we, as conservatives, face in the War on Terror. There is a deadly cancer in the world...Islamic terrorism...and it will eventually KILL our nation if we don't respond appropriately. The Patriot Act (chemotherapy) and pre-emptive war (surgery) are the tools by which we MAY survive. Thus, we compromise our beliefs (libertarianism) in order to avoid likely destruction. I wish we didn't need National ID cards, I wish we didn't need many provisions of the Patriot Act...but WE DO need them to enhance our chances for survival.

So you and Bob Barr can die with your belief system intact...I personally would rather live to fight another day. And as for your comments about Barr and the ACLU...well...he's just being naive. Hell, if the ACLU actually stood for what it was founded to achieve, I would be a member...but it's not what it's supposed to be...it's just a tool for left wing agendas.

[u-89]

>And just how much privacy and freedom do you think we'll have when we're living under Islamic Shari'a law

The only way the US will ever succcumb to Islam is through the insane immigration polices of the Republican Democrat system. We're inviting them in with open arms (and wallets) and both parties are doing their best to get their votes this November. Some war on terror, some self defense.

[Middle Man]

Flashback to a November 2002 Fox News report hosted by Brit Hume on Israeli spying in America. Just the link posted, since the transcripts are quite lengthy.

Interesting fact I did not know: Israeli-based firm Amdocs has contracts with the 25 largest telecommunications companies in U.S. with ability to record virtually every directory assistance call and phone billing entry.

[u-89]

> So you and Bob Barr can die with your belief system intact...I personally would rather live to fight another day.

Fight what? The totalitarian police state you gladly welcomed? Reminds me of the Ukrainians welcoming the Wehrmacht as liberators in '41.

Would you be so keen on the Patriot Act and TIPS, etc. if Hillary proposed it?

[MarkDel]

U-89,

You didn't address the analogy which utterly defeats your points. I gave you enough credit to write a serious response to your initial points, but your lack of a serious reply suggests that you may be the "troll" others are treating you as...

[Dalan]

"The only way the US will ever succcumb to Islam is through the insane immigration polices of the Republican Democrat system. We're inviting them in with open arms (and wallets) and both parties are doing their best to get their votes this November"

On this I agree with you completely. I couldn't possible disagree more with George Bush on his immigration policy.

Regarding the national ID card proposal, there is a possible alternative, but NOBODY wants to talk about it. If we could lock down our borders and institute a summary round 'em up & deport 'em, one strike and you're out immigration policy, we wouldn't have to be talking about national ID.

Unfortunately, this would require dropping the pretense of political correctness and actually naming this war for what it really is.

The Left has made that impossible.

The Left is who got us into this situation where we have to talk about national ID cards, not the Right. The Right is merely facing up to a reality that the Left would prefer to sweep back under the carpet.

[MarkDel]

Dalan,

Well said.

[steve-b]

do you have an alternative

The government needs to stop sabotaging effective civilian self-defense (e.g. by recognizing that the Second Amendment means what it says).

That will put a much bigger obstacle in the way of terrorists (and ordinary violent criminals) than your silly and offensive "yahr pehpas, pliz" policy.

[steve-b]

Answer the question:

Would you be so keen on the Patriot Act and TIPS, etc. if Hillary proposed it?

[ExposeDem]

Thanks for the article! I'm quite surprised they allowed you to post it.

Wake up traditional conservatives and realize that Neo-con's have an agenda and it's not in the interest of America. Neo-con's are NOT conservatives, they are liberal socialists whose loyalty belongs to another country. Make no doubt about it, President Bush was deceived and I'm not talking about Chalibi.

PLEASE read George Washington's Farewell Address!
http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/farewell/transcript.html

The Non-Patriots on this site will most likely call the father of our country an anti-semite but ignore.

I will be making a copy of my post as traditional conservative voices are often quickly deleted from this site.

Regards,
A Proud, Loyal Patriot who Loves My Country

[freeeee]

And just how much privacy and freedom do you think we'll have when we're living under Islamic Shari'a law, hmmm?

Living under Shari'a Law? You're implying that without national ID we'll be overrun militarily and ruled by an occupying force, such as post WWII Japan. Such a scenario is laughably absurd, and only makes for a pithy non-excuse for national ID.

No military force on Earth can occupy the United States. You know it, I know it, and most importantly Islamonuts know it. That's why they don't send armies, they send terrorists. Terrorists cannot hold ground, they can only do some quick damage in which they are also killed.

A more realistic question you might ask is would I prefer a higher risk of another successful terrorist attack to national ID. To which I say: HELL YES. Why? Because when given a choice of liberty or death, free people choose liberty or they don't stay free.

Now there is one way we can be subject to Shari'a Law: we can impose it on ourselves. Why would we do this? Because of the absurd immigration policies neo-cons love so much allow for pretty much anyone to emigrate here and start voting. In the pure democracy we've become, all Sharia's advocates need to do is win a voting majority.

Now, let's see if you can answer without a dodge: do you have an alternative, besides denial of the problem?

America will continue to draw terrorism so long as it continues to interfere with other nations. Since a face to face fight is not preferable to our enemies, they will always choose the hit and run tactics of terrorism. A national ID will not change that fact. A departure from the megalomanical foreign policy will.

Virtually everything on this site is about freedom!

...he says, moments after advocating biometric national ID. At least neo-cons are consistent in their hypocrisy.

[Marianne]

Show me one actual case of abuse of Patriot Act powers. Just one. Cite one single case filed by the ACLU against the Justice Department for Patriot Act invasion of civil rights. Just one!

"Critics: Patriot Act Warnings Come to Fruition" LINK

[MarkDel]

Steve-B,

I should answer the question??? U-89 ignores the substance of my post and I'm dodging thinsgs??? You guys have all the intellectual integrity of the Democratic Party...you should reconsider your voter registration.

But unlike you and your "Buchanan crowd" buddies, I do answer questions directly.

Yes, after 9/11 if Hillary Clinton were President and was actively pursuing the War on Terror, I would still support the Patriot Act and related legislation. Our lives are more important than my political ideology.

[agitator]

When the definition of "abuse" is deemed to mean something *illegal*, then governments never commit *any* abuse :)

[Dalan]

"The government needs to stop sabotaging effective civilian self-defense (e.g. by recognizing that the Second Amendment means what it says)."

Oh steve you're really taking a flier here! (But I realize that's what happens when your argument falls apart).

What does the Second Amendment have to do with the discussion at hand, and who is a better defender of it, Republican or Democrat?

Are you suggesting that the Second Amendment is an alternative solution to our security issues via vigilante justice? What, should we all just go around shooting everyone who looks Arab or has an Islamic-sounding name?

As much as I value our second ammendment rights, let's admit one thing: the right to keep and bear arms is defensive. You can't win a war through defense alone.

I'm all for the right to keep and bear arms. But let's be realistic: what good is my concealed .45 gonna do me if some Islamocultist decides to infuse anthrax into the subway's air circulation system when I'm on my way to work? What good will it do me if a truck-bomb explodes outside the building I'm working in?

Oh sure, personal arms will be useful when we get down to the end-game and we're dealing face-to-face and house-to-house with being overrun and enslaved by Islam. Personally, I'd rather not see it get to that point.

[MarkDel]

freeeee,

Terrorists may not "hold ground" in a traditional military sense, but they can inflict massive damage to pave the way to inherited ground by those on the other side. Nuclear and biological attacks by a terrorists are a REALITY, and after millions of Americans were killed, those who benefit from such an act would inherit the power lost by Western interests. Hence the Islamic World "gains ground" when the United States and other Western nations suffer mass losses in nuclear and/or biological attack.

And when you say that you'd risk more terrorist attacks rather than have a national ID card..well, we have to agree to disagree and I can take some solace in knowing that your position is in the distinct minority.

And your comments about America is only a target because we interfere with other nations...I don't even know where to begin with that idiocy. Your isolationism may have worked 200 years ago, but in an age of nuclear weapons, quick mass transportation all over the globe....god, why am I arguing this...if you can't see the difference in vulnerability in the modern world, there's no point in arguing with you.

[MarkDel]

Marianne,

You make a good point. I personally think it is BEYOND LUDICROUS that the Attorney General, or anyone else for that matter, would spend any time at all going after stuff like strip clubs or gambling, or other "vice" areas like that.

However, as the saying goes, "you don't throw out the baby with the bath water..."

[freeeee]

Hence the Islamic World "gains ground" when the United States and other Western nations suffer mass losses

Gain ground where? Overseas? Tell me again why I should care?

And when you say that you'd risk more terrorist attacks rather than have a national ID card..well, we have to agree to disagree and I can take some solace in knowing that your position is in the distinct minority.

True, many people don't have the guts to defend their liberty in the face of violence. So foreigners threaten you, and you cower.

Your isolationism may have worked 200 years ago, but in an age of nuclear weapons, quick mass transportation all over the globe.

You speak of means and nothing of motives. Why do terrorists attack the US? Because we interfere with their nations in pursuit of our "national interests", which is a blank check for whatever powerful interests want.

14 of the 17 9-11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia. And by coincidence of course, the House of Saud would never survive election there and is propped up by the US Govt because they'll "play ball".