[kesg]

"The man who gives up liberty for security deserves neither liberty or security."

But who wants to give up one for the other when you can have both?

[AzaleaCity5691]

You can't have both.

No one wants to think that it could happen here, but it almost did in the 1930's. (I'm referring to Long)

Once you give the government these expansive emergency powers, it's only a matter of time before they decide, it's an emergency, and the police state begins to set in.

The government already has a track record of getting away with using the military to enforce decisions in various parts of the country. There is a precedent for this, and anyone who ignores this puts their freedom in peril.

[Gondring]

>>"The man who gives up liberty for security deserves neither liberty or security."

>But who wants to give up one for the other when you can have both?

EXACTLY! There's no need to give up liberty to have security...That false choice is the fallacy that the PATRIOT ACT supporters try to get people to swallow, and once they've swallowed that lie, then it's easy to convince them that the restrictions on liberty are NEEDED!

[rattrap]

You can't have both. From your post you've obviously chosen safety. Za Rodina, Za Bush Comrade!