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

Skip to comments.

An Astounding Remark
Future of Freedom Foundation ^ | Sheldon Richman

Posted on 02/06/2002 5:05:45 AM PST by francisandbeans

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 381-394 next last
To: SteamshipTime
You assume wrong. Again. As usual.
181 posted on 02/06/2002 7:34:08 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: francisandbeans
Okay. Sure. Thanks.

And I am glad that you stopped winking at me...people were getting the wrong idea.

182 posted on 02/06/2002 7:36:21 AM PST by unsycophant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: francisandbeans
Further, I would sonner eat my own testicles than let the ACLU be the standard bearer of my liberties.

OK, ok. I'm convinced...

183 posted on 02/06/2002 7:36:38 AM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Obviously, we don't speak the lingo. Here, let me try:

Ashcroft is a sell-out to those statist globalists who would use the WOD to subvert our freedoms while they get all the money and ignore the Constitution and set up national monitoring on every single person while they let illegal aliens run amok and suck up to the liberals and get ready to ship us to work camps to serve the New World Order and what about those contrails and how about Area 51 and by the way I don't like George Bush he is a wimp and LIFE'S NOT FAIR!!!

There...did that about cover everything? I am going to go clean out a closet, now.

184 posted on 02/06/2002 7:38:05 AM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Nice try, Miss Marple.

Although you may now officially be declared a terrorist sympathizer just for typing those words.

185 posted on 02/06/2002 7:40:32 AM PST by francisandbeans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: francisandbeans
Why is it that everyone cuts off the first part of the sentence? It's simple, really... they cut it off because #1, they're dishonest. #2, because the last half suits their agenda better than the whole.

"To those who pit Americans against immigrants, citizens against non-citizens, to those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve," Ashcroft told the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Who is he referring to? Is he referring to everyone who is concerned about lost liberty? No, if he were, the first half of his sentence, the quantifiers, would be rather pointless. Mr. Ashcroft told the UN where to get off on the gun laws the UN tried to institute. Were it not for Ashcroft and others in this administration we'd be looking at a whole host of new gun laws right now that would make Jim Brady's wife proud, laws to bring this country in line with the UN objectives. Ashcroft's not the kind of person to treat your 'rights' lightly.

So who is he referring to here? It really does not take a genius to figure it out- he is talking about people who are kneejerk anti-immigrant, the ones who are like the moron on the threads the other night who was advocating putting ALL moslims in detention camps. Amusingly the guy thought that would protect our 'rights.' He was willing to imprison people based on race, religion or nationality to preserve out 'liberty.' Ashcroft's not talking about people who are against just illegal immigrants- he's talking about people whose first agenda is a hatred of any and all immigrants, whether they've done something wrong or not. To convince people of the need to clamp down on immigrants, they preach about immigrants - all immigrants- being the cause of lost rights. Do you fit that bill, francisandbeans? Hate 'em all, do you? I don't think so. Those who hate people just because they weren't born here or have a funny religion are no defenders of liberty, whether they use the spectre of lost rights to justify their agenda or not.

"To those who pit Americans against immigrants, citizens against non-citizens, to those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve," Ashcroft told the Senate Judiciary Committee.

He's talking about people who are trying to stir up hatred to suit their agenda... he is NOT talking about 'anyone and everyone' who is concerned about civil liberties. He's not talking about three groups of people, immigrant haters, non-citizen haters, and civil libertarians- he's talking about ONE group of people which fits that description. (Think about it- is there a difference between people who are against immigrants and people who don't like non-citizens?

Get a life people. There is nothing wrong with discussing civil liberties but there is something wrong with people shouting 'nuke em all' or 'put them all in camps.' There is nothing wrong with being concerned about illegal immigration, or loose immigration laws. But there is something wrong when people want to stir up enmity between groups of people here in the US for no other reason than that they don't like 'foreigners.' Ashcroft's not even threatening people who are of the hate-all-immigrant mentality- he's just pointing out that they are not what they appear, and that such people are not doing us any good.

He is right when he says this:

"They give ammunition to America's enemies and pause to America's friends. They encourage people of good will to remain silent in the face of evil.

He is speaking out against the EXACT SAME MENTALITY WHICH THE NAZIS USED TO JUSTIFY THEIR ATTACKS ON INNOCENT PEOPLE.

Remember the famous quote that goes something like this? - "...When they came for the Jews, I said nothing because I wasn't a Jew...when they came for the gypsies I said nothing because I was not a Gypsy..."

Sounds an awful lot like 'when they came for the muslims, I said nothing because I was not a muslim... when they came for the Arab Christians I said nothing because I was not an Arab Christian...when they came for the Sudanese animists I said nothing because I was not a Sudanese animist... when they came for me there was no one left to say anything.'

Ashcroft is absolutely right. 'The ship them all back' talk and 'round them all up and lock them away' talk does make us look like NAZIs. It does not win you any friends. In fact, it's a good deal more frightening than your misinterpretation of what a man said. That 'hate them all' kind of talk, right about the time Ashcroft gave that speech, had resulted in some Indians and Sikhs getting murdered by some 'patriotic Americans' thinking they were doing good by attacking 'mooooslims.' Remember the guy who murdered some innocent guy and then announced how proud he was to do it for America, or some stupid comment like that?

Yes, I bet he was real concerned about 'rights' too. Only his own, of course. He wasn't a bit concerned about the man he shot. I bet he would be screaming bloody murder over Ashcroft's 'abbreviated' comment right alongside you folks.

I for one don't trust people who crop someone's words to make a soundbite for their agenda, as the author did... and as Senator Leahy does. If someone did that here on FR we would all look guilty of any infraction you can imagine. A little snip here, a little snip there, and you're guilty of advocating anything, depending on which audience someone wants to inflame with the 'edited' comments.

186 posted on 02/06/2002 7:40:56 AM PST by piasa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NC_Libertarian
That's too bad. I hope the "powers that be" are responsible enough to treat Noelle as they would any other person who comes through the judicial system - but they won't.

I also hope she gets some help with her drug problem. Xanex is well known by people who use for allowing you to sleep when you can't after an amphetamine bender. I doubt she was trying to get Xanex just to do Xanex.

187 posted on 02/06/2002 7:41:23 AM PST by realpatriot71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: francisandbeans
LOL! I will be happy to talk to the FBI anytime they ask.

I will just show them this entire thread.

188 posted on 02/06/2002 7:41:35 AM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; francisandbeans; Dane; Loopy; Dick Bachert; dead;
ahem...

And QUIT trashing each other. You know who you are. Knock it off! Way too many flamewars and feuds going on.

This hardly seems productive.

189 posted on 02/06/2002 7:41:54 AM PST by Pistias
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Jefferson Adams
Folks, while it's really a lot of fun - and healthy, IMO - to have discussions such as this one, the fact of the matter is that we're at a point in America's history where some scary things are taking place.

Let me sum a few of them up -

1) We were attacked

2) Almost immediately, things were put in place, into law, which had, in fact, been sitting on the shelf for several years because the powers that be knew they wouldn't be accepted a) The PATRIOT Act - which wasn't even available to be read before the vote in Congress. It was passed, without reading it, and it decimates several important parts of the Bill of Rights. Do we realize the HUGENESS of the fact that a bill was passed - without "our" congressthings even reading it??? - that removes basic liberties guaranteed by our Constitution?

b) The Office of Homeland Security was instituted - it had been created during the Clinton era, but it was just sitting and waiting. Bush didn't mention that it was a Clinton creation - he just implemented it as his own.

c) Now we have the Attorney General of the United States saying that if people are concerned about losing freedoms because of what "our" government is doing, they're aiding the terrorists.

My God, people - how can you see these events, in that order, and not be scared to death about what's happening to your country?

190 posted on 02/06/2002 7:42:01 AM PST by Jefferson Adams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: francisandbeans
Yep! no doubt about it Ashcroft is the anti-christ! What should I do!!!Oh! what should I do. If we can only get Reno back!! ~~{;^D
191 posted on 02/06/2002 7:45:04 AM PST by fish hawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
So sorry. I just assumed a freedom-loving patriot like yourself would exercise personal responsibility for his own safety rather than obsequiously relying on men that pulled every string they could to avoid combat duty in Vietnam and now proclaim "war" from the safety of their well-guarded offices. Since this is not the case, this gets us back to my #107 above. Care to address it?
192 posted on 02/06/2002 7:45:10 AM PST by SteamshipTime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
There...did that about cover everything? I am going to go clean out a closet, now.

After the first 2/3 of your post spoke Truth about what's going on right before our eyes, you have to go clean out a closet.

OK. Do it fast. In another couple of years you may need to file paperwork with the government before undertaking such a task. After all - it's really the federal government's closet, you know :)

193 posted on 02/06/2002 7:45:11 AM PST by Jefferson Adams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: piasa
You make a strong argument, but the first clause beginning "To those" could be read as being seperate from the second beginning "to those" as well.
194 posted on 02/06/2002 7:46:07 AM PST by Pistias
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: SteamshipTime
I just assumed a freedom-loving patriot like yourself would exercise personal responsibility for his own safety rather than obsequiously relying on men that pulled every string they could to avoid combat duty in Vietnam and now proclaim "war" from the safety of their well-guarded offices.

Is that a macro?

195 posted on 02/06/2002 7:46:08 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: NC_Libertarian
Perhaps the only argument that Republicans will listen to.

They'll be screaming it from the rooftops the next time a dem gets in office. Maybe it won't be too late by then.

196 posted on 02/06/2002 7:46:22 AM PST by AUgrad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: unsycophant
Whatever you say chief.

Unsycophant! And I thought Loopy was an ironic moniker. LOL, ROTFLMAO.

197 posted on 02/06/2002 7:46:34 AM PST by Loopy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: francisandbeans
When Attorney General John Ashcroft told the nation, "To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists.

Either you are with us or you are a terrorist.

198 posted on 02/06/2002 7:46:53 AM PST by thepitts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pistias
Excuse me, but I was being discussed on this thread by more than one poster before I even knew it existed. I am going to defend myself.

You might want to take up your disagreement with them.

199 posted on 02/06/2002 7:47:17 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: piasa
Thank you for posting that. I hadn't seen it in its entirety.

While it does soften the blow, I refuse to allow him to accuse anyone who isn't directly funding and supporting terrorism as "one who aide terrorism." That is pure unadulterated propoganda. I am pro-immigration, and even though he takes a swipe at my opponents on that issue, he is wrong. I am pro-civil liberties. He is painting me with that brush. It is a scary statement as a snippet and just as much so in the entire statement. I will not be called someone who aids terrorism. I refuse to and ashcroft can "stop" the UN from getting our guns all he wants, all it tells me that he read one right in a bill of many.

200 posted on 02/06/2002 7:47:20 AM PST by francisandbeans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 381-394 next last

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.

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