“We have been told that we have to give up our freedoms in order to be safe because terrorism is such a horrible event,” Paul said today to more than 1,000 supporters who attended a rally at a downtown Chicago hotel ballroom.I think some people on this thread are quoting Ron Paul out of context. He is asking us to put the entire situation with terrorism into perspective. President Franklin Roosevelt said once in his first inaugural speech right after the Depression had gotten into full swing:
“A lot fewer lives died on 9/11 than they do in less than a month on our highways, but once again, who owns the highways? Do we own the highways? No. It’s a government institution you know. …We need to put all this in perspective.”
This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.A strong leader should tell the people in times of distress to remain calm and avoid rushing to conclusions. A wise leader will tell the people to use reason instead of fear to base any important decisions.
Refusal to accept the chains of fear is a time-honored American tradition. Consider General John Stark's July 31, 1809 toast:
Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils.Ron Paul could also ask the question: how many should die from terror attacks before it is reasonable for us to adopt the major characteristics of a police state, as some have suggested we must do?
The only proper answer is that we will fight to the last man before we accept tyranny.
The only proper answer is that we will fight to the last man before we accept tyranny.
In the words of Dwight Eisenhower:
"If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison. They’ll have enough to eat, a bed and a roof over their heads. But if an American wants to preserve his dignity and his equality as a human being, he must not bow his neck to any dictatorial government."
Putting something "into perspective" entails making valid comparisons among like things. Comparing the number of people killed by terrorist acts to the number of people killed in highway accidents is a nonsense comparison. The latter has no place whatsoever in a national security discussion to begin with.
A strong leader should tell the people in times of distress to remain calm and avoid rushing to conclusions. A wise leader will tell the people to use reason instead of fear to base any important decisions.
Who's not "calm"? Who has "rushed to conclusions"? Who's "using fear" and not reason to make their decisions? What are these vague accusations you (and Paul?) are making?
Ron Paul could also ask the question: how many should die from terror attacks before it is reasonable for us to adopt the major characteristics of a police state, as some have suggested we must do?
I don't know who "some" is. I know of no serious people who have "suggested" we "must" do anything of the sort. Is this straw-man the entire content of your post?
The only proper answer is that we will fight to the last man before we accept tyranny.
What "tyranny"? What are you talking about? How odd that in this time of incipient "tyranny", you have managed to somehow - miraculously - find a way to post your anti-tyrannical views to an interent message board, yet for some reason have neglected to regale us with the actual details of the suffering you've surely endured living under all this tyranny of Bush's iron fist.