I am quite aware of what the man said, BUT, it is all a matter of relativity. Would I want a greatly heightened chance of terrorism because I would rather the authorities treated these times like the 1950's? The answer from my perspective is a resounding no. We live in a different time and these times, given the face, or lack thereof of the enemy require a different approach. The enemy wears no uniform, hides weapons in his places of worship and id counting on this nations obsession with political correctness to by their ally in the war. Consider the inconvenience of increased security part of the war effort if it makes you feel better. If freedom is our nations most precious resource then it is certainly worth a sacrifice or 2. This is no less a war then WW was and the enemy is in many ways far more dangerous and hard to deal with.
This has nothing to do with the war on terrorism. (1) The dogs are searching for drugs, not weapons or explosives and (2) these powers were sought out by law enforcement long before 9/11.
(sarcasm)Yes. Freedom must be restricted and rationed or we will surely lose it.(/sarcasm)
Is that a quote from somewhere? Or are the italicized portions of your post your very own?
"...Consider the inconvenience of increased security part of the war effort if it makes you feel better..."
According to your posts on this thread, you sure seem to enjoy enduring roughshod treatment by the government. Why should lawful, courteous adherence to the Constitution be mutually-exclusive from normal law enforcement procedures? Both goals can and should be achieved simultaneously.
~ Blue Jays ~
I disagree. If what you say is true (that we are on a war footing equal to World War II) then where are the concentration camps holding all muslims who are a threat? Where is your draft notice? Where is your gas rationing card? Where is the Congressional declaration of war? Why havn't we dropped a nuke on Mecca?