Gov Tom Ridge To Take New Cabinet Post, Of "Homeland Defense"

DC Sources

[MindBender26]

He is former Repub Gov of PA. Wounded RVN Vet.<p<More will follow

[HalfIrish]

picture this office run by a Clinton appointee. Say Reno.

Gun-grabber Ridge is better than Reno. By how much, though?

[HalfIrish]

I guess that guy thinks it's "common snese" to think like a liberal. Wow, they never cease to amaze me!

[codder too]

And we though that FEMA had to much POWER......

[poet]

How right you are. The repubs do it to us slowly while they blow in our ear while the dems do it faster with no kisses. I don't trust either party that's why I am registered as an independant. Bottom line tho, we have to support the Pres at this time while at the same time keep vigilant.

[BluesDuke]

LET ME REPEAT IT AGAIN, UNLESS YOU SUPPORT SOCIETAL RESTRAINTS ON MORALITY, YOU DO NOT SUPPORT OUR CONSTITUTION OR OUR FOUNDING FATHERS.

Permit me to point forth that "societal" restraints do not necessarily entail those inflicted by law. A "societal" restraint is very different from that of the law. (The Constitution, by the way, says nothing about "societal" restraints. And, for another and very critical points, properly construed, mere "societal" restraints would not necessarily abrogate the rights of the innocent in the process, as only too often the force of the law does.)

A "societal" restraint would entail nothing more drastic or intrusive than the application of properly construed social influence (pressure, if you like, but applied without coercion and without running to the force of the law) against that which a free community of free individuals might together deem abhorrent. A "societal" restraint would acknowledge, perhaps without quite saying it outright, that what you do in your own home, on your own property, out and away from view of the public square, is nobody's business but your own and God's (unless - big "unless" - there is a legitimate presence that you will endanger another person therein or from therein); however, the same "societal" restraint would allow that if you bring it into the public square or otherwise think of coercing another against that other's will to partake along with you, then and only then does the force of law have any legitimate presence to restrain or, if and when appropriate, to punish what you.

Properly construed libertarian sociopolitical philosophy in fact prefers the application of "societal" power over that of State power in resolving such matters as would add up, by most anyone's definition, as moral matters. Properly construed libertarian sociopolitical philosophy distinguishes between vice (which is something one does to or upon oneself strictly) and crime (which is something does to, upon, or against another), and grants to a properly construed government the strict power of preventing one citizen from obstructing or abrogating a fellow citizen's equivalent right to life, liberty, property.

A proper libertarian would say of vice, "Your vice is abhorrent to me, but so long as you do it only to or upon yourself, in the privacy of your own home, it is none of my legitimate concern except as you have asked me what I think of what you do. You are indulging a vice but vice is not crime until or unless you either try by force to involve me in your vice, or until or unless you indulge or perform your vice in the public square and thus inflict upon your fellow citizens its direct presence. And at that moment and only at that moment does a properly construed government - as opposed to the improperly consecrated State - have the properly construed business of punishing you.

And, just for the record, as regards the atrocities of last week, a proper libertarian would indeed applaud the United States taking such action, committing such force, as would remove both the actual perpetrators and such of those nations who supported or nourished the act of war from their further ability to make war against the United States. A libertarian may believe (does believe) that it is unacceptable to start or provoke hostilities, but he does believe that when force has been initiated against his country - as most certainly it was against the United States, and in perhaps the most heinous manner (put it this way: At least then-Imperial Japan didn't even think of sending suicide commandos to bomb downtown San Francisco) - then it should not even need saying that his country is within every last one of her rights to strike back and defend her citizens and their lives, liberty, property against such attack.

There may be an argument (there probably is an argument) that official American meddling in the affairs of other nations infuriates said nations, that official American alliance with certain nations infuriates certain other nations, but that does not confer upon said nations the right to attack especially those who have not a damned thing whatsoever to do with official American conduct, as those in the World Trade Center had not. From which point, the proper libertarian says: Deplore war though I do and always will, in this instance our business is plain and proper: We have been attacked, and it is our right and duty to pick out the appropriate targets, the targets through which our enemy or enemies are able to make or nourish war upon us, and hit them low and hard and with such materiels as get the job done with the most expedience and the least feasible loss of life to both our American fighting men and women and to native noncombatants where we must otherwise fight. And, when the bitter job that must be done is done, our proper obligation is to get the hell out, and get back to the serious business of properly protecting our fellow citizens' lives, liberties, and properties against all who would obstruct, abrogate, or attack them from abroad and from at home.

That's the view from this libertarian, anyway.

[pray4liberty]

Since Governor Ridge and the General Assembly made sweeping changes to the state's welfare system in 1996, more than 210,000 families have left the welfare rolls and have not returned.

Did they go to Maryland? Hehehehe

[185JHP]

The thing is, we need some intelligence collection on homeland threats. OTOH we don't want a bunch who open an investigation on anyone they see using Russian dressing. There would be a heavy risk in having the FBI do this, with the stench of their traitors still so sharp. It's a compromise, and symbols are important.

[pray4liberty]

Oh good. Now we can have turf wars amongst Homeland Defense, DOD, the AG (FBI)and Treasury (ATF & SS). Just what we need.

While I can understand the necessity right now, this "Homeland Defense" post can evolve into a monster that could threaten our rights if we are not vigilant. Just imagine a Janet Reno in that post with her crazy ideas of what a terrorist is. It is our duty as citizens to keep watch.

When this war is over then this post should be closed down.

[TERMINATTOR]

To arms, to arms, the terrorists are coming!

America's Militia wants YOU!

Weekend alert summary.
FReeper report of middle eastern men asking for location of water plants.

Nine out of ten Americans will fight to keep George W. Bush in the white house, and Osama bin Laden out!

[lavaroise]

Good point, we need civil defense more than we need agencies and studies about civil defense these days.

[tberry]

2, 4, 6, 8: who do we appreciate? BUSH, BUSH, BUSH!!!

It is necessary to: Set up the internment camps.

It is necessary to: Print the Government ID cards.

It is necessary to: Put the picture recognition software on every street in America.

It is necessary to: Make it easier to wiretap everyone.

It is necessary to: Get Carnivore up and running at 110 percent.

It is necessary to: To know and control everything about everyone to keep everyone safe from "THE ENIMEY"

Don't be fools and give away our God given rights as proclaimed by the Constitution

Remember, it's as true now as it was then.

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty; it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -- William Pitt

[MindBender26]

I would remind you about certain Presidential responsibilities to protect us against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Other than paranoia, what's wrong with a system of non-counterfitable ID cards? I would love to have one card that would replace all the other ID I end up carrying. Secondly, I would love face rocognition sysytems at airports, ports of entry, etc. Wiretaps still must have the approval of a judge.

Remember your history, or suffer it again.

[patriot93]

I do believe that this is the Hart-Rudman Commision report referred to above.
And no, pray4liberty, this is not intended to go away after Terrorism is defeated. It's a new, permanent feature of the Government.
CCOPS has bumped the "Tolitarian Time" clock from 9:49 to 10:19 PM.

[pray4liberty]

And no, pray4liberty, this is not intended to go away after Terrorism is defeated. It's a new, permanent feature of the Government.

That's what I was afraid of.