Posted on 01/01/2006 2:55:51 PM PST by SunSetSam
December 30, 2005 - The argument over whether President Bush has the authority to direct the National Security Agency to listen in on the conversations of suspected terrorists on US soil is split primarily into two camps; those who believe we are engaged in a war for our very survival against radical Islam and those who believe – and always have – that terrorism operates under a set of rules that govern its actions and therefore should be treated as a law enforcement issue. This is just another example of why there should have been a formal declaration of war after September 11, 2001.
It needs to be repeated as many times as necessary until every single American acknowledges this supposition as a distinct possibility; should we lose this war against radical Islam and the terror it uses to breed fear and submission, our way of life, our government and our country, will cease to exist as we know it.
Those on the “progressive” left have just begun mentally chewing on what for them is a gargantuan idea, that the military conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq are but battles in a much more monumental war. Those who understand the danger facing our country have come to the realization that there are two major fronts in our struggle for survival; the physical front (locations of armed conflict) and the ideological front (where the battles for the mind of a society take place).
It is very important to be victorious on the physical battlefields and so far we have been successful. As much as the “progressive” left and the mainstream media would have us believe that we are struggling to achieve victory, the evidence of our success is overwhelming and validated by the millions of purple fingers we have seen in Iraq over the course of three truly free elections. It is further evidenced by the free elections in Afghanistan and accurate polling of both countries that indicate their people believe that their “future’s so bright they have to wear shades.”
If we are to compare Iraq to Vietnam in any way at all it would have to be in contrast. US military efforts in Iraq stand as testimony to the idea that if allowed to do their jobs, and complete their mission devoid of interference from the “progressive” elite in Washington DC and their blind followers who haven’t the vision to see past the daily protest march, the US military will always be victorious. They are superiorly trained and equipped, and motivated by the desire to fight for the freedom of oppressed people rather than, by gutless default, pave the way for tyranny.
More difficult than armed conflict, the ideological front is a battle for the will of our society and is already taking place on our own soil. The controversy over the NSA directive issued by President Bush is a prime example.
Again it needs to be repeated as often as need be; should we lose this war against the oppressive mandates of radical Islam our country will cease to exist as we know it. There will be no civil liberties. There will be no judicial recourse. There will be no petitioning of our government. There will be no First Amendment rights, or Second, or Third. If we fail to be victorious over the fundamentalist zealots who promote radical Islam, not only as a religion but as a totalitarian way of life, this “experiment in democracy” that is our government will be, if texts other than the Quran are even allowed, a short chapter in The History of Infidel North America Before Islam.
It is ironic then that an organization such as the American Civil Liberties Union is fighting for the “rights” of those who would dismantle and outlaw the ACLU, if not behead its leaders, should radical Islam be victorious.
It is paradoxical then that defense lawyers are attempting to have courts overturn the convictions of confessed terrorists and self-avowed al Qaeda operatives. For these lawyers to stand on principle is one thing, for them to stand on principle only to see their freed clients return to the battle against the very principles used to free them is quite another.
It is reckless for “progressive” politicians and activists to be arguing points of order regarding the president’s execution of this war effort when the same points of order, directives and tactics have been used by past presidents and validated by established courts and authorities. In fact, their obstinate refusal to acknowledge recorded history can very well be considered aiding and abetting the enemy and there are consequences for those actions written into the Constitution, unlike the mounting number of fictitious rights frequently referred to by the “progressive” left.
In an effort to safeguard the ideological liberties the Framers had in mind at the writings of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution, the “progressive” left is willing to enable our enemies to use our own system to bring about our country’s demise. If the “progressive” left is truly supporting our troops and if they truly want to win the war against the encroaching influence of radical Islam and the terror they use to victimize all who stand in their way, if they are really on our side then it is time for their actions to speak for them instead of their words. So far their words have been selfishly divisive and irresponsible. It is beyond naïve to believe that their words are not being put to good use in the ideological battle our enemy is ruthlessly waging against us.
At Sunday Mass, our Priest was talking about some of the Heresay surrounding Mary being the "Mother of God" or the "Mother of Jesus". He said that during the 4th to 6th centuries the Church had both the problem of heretics and politics which was an explosive mixture that threatened to destroy the Church.
I was thinking that this is exactly what Islam is going through now.
Sure, some of them. That's obvious. But this is a silly argument between "governments don't kill any of their people" and "governments don't kill ALL of their people." The latter assertion is the one that I say is correct, and the former one is the one you say is wrong. Whoop dee do.
It wasn't. It went straight to the heart of the matter.
In response to ...
What specific rights would one lose by having a government minder and being required to submit to quarterly audits by the IRS?you replied ... "I don't see any rights we've lost. The aclu is a greater threat to this country than our government."
I do agree, having a government minder would not compromise any of my rights, nor would compulsory quarterly audits by the IRS. And if you meant to agree with my hypothetical when you said "I don't see any rights we've lost," let me say that I just didn't take it as agreement.
So I went on to say ...
I wasn't trying to make that comparison, as to which posed a greater risk. I was probing the extent of government action that would in fact constitute a loss of rights. I hypothesized an all-seeing Big Brother, and concluded that such an entity would not impinge my rights. I can think of lots of government incursions that are a pain to comply with, but am having a hard time coming up with a realisitic fact pattern that constitutes a violation of my rights. I don't expect to be quartering the military or a minder, and short of that, as long as I am free to move about (even if I have to show papers or other proof of meeting regulations), what right is lost?
To which you singled out the phrase "I wasn't trying to make that comparison" and replied, "I know you weren't, I was."
And you consider that going straight to the heart of the matter? LOL.
"No government, no matter how despotic, is out to destroy it's people."
Where did I say 'all'? Please don't put words in my mouth.
Those guys aren't destroying THEIR people. They want to keep THEIR tribe happy and compliant.
You can frame it any way that makes you comfortable. You have already reversed yourself without saying so. Now you are nit picking to save face. Enough already.
You responded... I was probing the extent of government action that would in fact constitute a loss of rights.
You continue to talk about rights being taken from us. You keep changing horses in the middle of the stream.
You do like verbiage, don't you?
That you don't have reading comprehension skills in regards to others post, is your problem.
Blah blah blah.
The response I expected. lol
And you say I have reading comprehension problems? Bwahahahahahahaha
Just sparing the verbiage.
I got it.
It is interesting that you cannot point out one civil liberty that has been lost over the War on Terror. New liberties have been created to protect the terrorists. So tell me, what liberty have you lost?
I love how people who can't argue around a fact call the fact that is giving them all the trouble a "strawman". You lose on this one, because the truth is no freedom has been lost, in fact new freedoms have been gained.
I wasn't "arguing around a fact." I was asserting that the argument "you haven't lost a right" amounts to a strawman line of argument. I even went on to agree with "no freedom has been lost."
I further opined that no freedom would be lost if we were required to submit to IRS audits on a quarterly basis, or if we had government minders not quartered in our homes.
It must be a complex point, because you and a few others miss it entirely.
"Once again, that doesn't bother me. Right or wrong, that's how I feel. Nothing is secure, was it ever?"
Our Founding Fathers placed the highest value on freedom and liberty...They were ready to sacrifice all, in order to maintain those values...I'll be honest with you..I find people of that selfish point of view to be a bigger threat than anything else we are facing as a nation today. People are very aware of the war on terror..They are aware, and they realize that there are people in this world that are out to do us harm, so they are vigilant of it. They don't realize though, that there is also a threat from within...In your own words "Once again, that doesn't bother me. Right or wrong, that's how I feel." Right or wrong that's how you feel, and notice the "once again" part, it implies that there are many issues just like this that you hold similar opinions on...Have you no sense of truth and justice? You admit yourself that you don't care about right or wrong, all you seem to care about is how you feel, and what you want. How I praise my Lord that our Founding Fathers did not share your attitude, we'd be sitting in a country on level to France, or worse... This country does not exist today because of selfish views of a few..It exists because of the blood, sweat, and tears of so many that understood the true beauty she held..They understood that you couldn't just go anywhere and be free, they understood the value of capitalist society, and the treasure it holds for those who are not afraid to do some hardwork.. But most of all they knew that there was no better game on Earth, and that for the better of her being, their lives were worth the sacrifice. They understood that it was a government to represent a nation, not to control it, and they gave all for that ideal. That's why everyone came from far and wide, ready and willing to do most anything to become an American, or secure the opportunity that their child would gain its precious birthright. They willing went to their deaths either through backbreaking labor, to secure a better place for their family..Or they went by the hand of a bullet, bomb or bayonet dying to protect the gift they had received, and wished to protect for their children. Fact is, our nation is what it is today because so many have held her in such high regard that they fought and died for her. They laid their lives at her feet to secure her and keep her strong.. Nearly every move made by our Founding Fathers was made to secure the populace from tyranny, because they knew what it was to live less than free. When I hear people say "Oh, they weren't around for the information age, they didn't know about email." I laugh. I laugh at them. 'Secure in their person, papers, houses, and effects.' I'm sure anyone here with experience of going through a probate procedure knows what an effect is..An effect is anything belonging to the person...Anything. Only one with a questionable comprehension level, or one with a questionable agenda would try to interpret it any differently.... Our Fathers gave us the greatest gift on Earth, to be free of an oppressive government, and thrive according to our own merit. I'm not going to give it up just because one isn't wise enough appreciate it, or because one wishes to terrorize me enough to give it up. It isn't going to happen. I love my nation..and I love my God..and I love the gifts I have been given.. I will not let anyone convince me that I should spit on them with impunity, or cheapen them in anyway.. I will stand and rise to the occasion anytime, anywhere, any place. I love my nation..I am not trying to "change" her, I'm not trying to question her, and I'm not trying to give her away to the highest bidder, or the first person that says boo... I will defend her until there is no longer warm breath flowing through my lips...So, if the problem is that you really are "afraid" of terror, come hide behind my skirt, and I will keep you safe. Though I don't agree with your opinions, I will do my all to protect you, because that's what Americans do. But don't ask me to give up my liberty for your safety, because it isn't going to happen. I'm just sorry so many in this country don't understand what we have.. You admitted yourself freely that you aren't bothered by right and wrong, and that you only care about how you feel... Why don't you just stand back, and let the people who do care handle the matter? If you have no sense of right and wrong, and only care for your own feelings, you have no business in this fight. The stakes are just too high. I think it's great you don't have anything to hide, and guess what?? I don't either...But that does not give the government the right to do whatever they want unchecked.. To do so would be to throw away everything this nation has stood for since its conception..
Badray, JTN... Just trying out the feature you told me about. Do you get copies of this too?
Wear your burka in good health.
Yeah, okay. So are laws that restrict the performance of vehicles that will be permitted to be registered for use on public roadways (FMVSS). But the tax is constitutional, as are FMVSS.
Having quarterly audits would be an extension of a that lost freedom.
It would not impinge on your rights under the Constitution. I am not arguing that things would be the same as they are now - that's a silly take on my point. The challenge is to point out how one's rights have been affected, and in agreement I say they have not. I extend that (hyperbolicly, I admit) to illustrate that "you haven't lost any rights" isn't much of a substantive or even philosophical argument. In other words, winning the "doesn't impinge on your rights" argument doesn't defend the position very well.
Just my opinion mind you, but I see it as akin to the "atom bomb argument" in discussions of the 2nd amendment. Cute, but worthless.
The right not to have my property, papers, and effects looked through without a proper warrant, as specified in the Fourth Amendment.
I don't think you get the point friend... I'm not going to let anyone ruin this nation inside or out... Pick on my grammar if that's all you got... But I'm not going to let anyone destroy the liberty that I enjoy because their too selfish to understand what our nation was founded on. Got that, friend?? Ain't nobody gonna make me wear a burqua.. In fact, I'd love for them to try.. I'd make a shiney example out of what happens to a person that tries to come between me and my liberty. You toss out scare tactics with nothing to back them up.. Islam will never rule this country, and either will those who feel our liberty is to be given away...
Don't assume.
I'm not going to let anyone ruin this nation inside or out...
Ahhh, you're omnipotent now. Can you find a hat that fits your swelled headed opinion of yourself.
Got that, friend??
That's twice you've assumed incorrectly.
Pick on my grammar
If you were on this site for more than a couple of days, you would know that's how I speak.
Islam will never rule this country,
You're right about that because Bush has the authority to listen to terrorist making incoming calls. Calls that you would deny him.
You toss out scare tactics with nothing to back them up..
Really?
Then this thread should interest you...here
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.