Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ron H.

Well a few things:

1. If Americans would tolerate a govt going after them like this, we are WAY past worrying about whose the President, whose in Congress and what it says on those Bills they pass. As it is, we as a people have not shown even the slightest willingness to tolerate Americans being detained for a prolonged period of time without trial. In cases where the govt tried that-and note that these such cases are quite rare indeed-uproars and massive protests and huge legal fiascos followed. Again, see the Padilla case, eventually brought to civilian courts, see the Hamdi case, which the govt lost when it was brought to the Supreme Court.

2. It is about a balancing act, always, Back in your day, I am thinking that there wasnt the major threat of Islamic jihadists-including jihadists with US CITIZENSHIP-who intended on utterly exploiting and taking advantage of our freedoms to bring us down. It naturally had to lead to some degree of fewer freedoms and more restrictions, and during the Bush years, for sure in the few years after 9/11, conservatives by and large were okk with it. Imagine if the AUMF 2001 and the Patriot Act were passed inn the 60s or 70s ! Who knows how violently Americans would have reacted. Ditto with areas like high schools; we can see how restrictive high schools are relative to the 50s or 60s. But that’s in no small part because students back then didnt respond to being angry and frustrated by gunning down classmates. Now I am no fan of Zero Tolerance policies and I am aware of the need to watch the govt for expanding their rule beyond what is needed. The govt is full of people who have a human nature to crave more power once they have been given a certain degree of it. But it is about balance.

3. It is still disheartening to believe that our military would stand for something like that-an issue that has not really come up in all of this. I know how scary it is with our new govt., But FR always emphasizes the need to “support out troops” more than anyone. Doesnt that mean having some level of faith in them to do the right thing and uphold basic American liberties ?


141 posted on 01/04/2012 10:34:39 AM PST by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies ]


To: emax
I just hope you are right but I will be keeping my powder dry as I have less faith in government and therefore it politicians and in some cases my fellow American than some seem to have. I read somewhere, don't remember just where now that down through the (last 30-45) years members of our armed forces have been polled on what they thought about our forces having to be used on American citizens and the latest numbers have started to discourage me.

The numbers as I seem to recall were something like less that 15% thought it wasn't something they thought would be a good idea or would be willing to do or some similarly phrased response back in around 1965 and by the year 1995 or so that number was up to around 42% felt they wouldn't have any problems in allowing their forces to be used in an urban environment should their government order them to. I find those trending numbers troublesome if indeed they are true.

In any event the times are changing and not necessarily for the better. I agree much of what you said but as I said I still have my reservations as I've seen too much change that troubles me much and for the willingness of too many Americans to capitulate when it comes to protected rights v/s a sense of false security via self-serving laws.

144 posted on 01/04/2012 11:06:05 AM PST by Ron H. (We are witnessing the beginning of the end!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson