America Approves Limits to Liberties

The Detroit News ^ | September 16, 2001 | Cameron McWhirter

[riley1992]

Those limits to liberties are acceptable to Metro Detroiters and most other Americans. A Detroit News poll Thursday found that 88 percent of Metro Detroiters are willing to "accept restrictions on movements such as metal detectors and military personnel in public places" to increase the nation's security from terrorist attacks.

[Libloather]

Yes, that was absolutely over the line, also. What is your point?

another1 disagrees -
The statement you quoted was strong, but I believe a general reference to a particular type of person as described above. I see no personal attack on any poster here, or specified in the article. The post to which I responded specifically and personally attacked an individual posting here.

Maybe you two need to talk...

[Cultural Jihad]

I pointed you to an excellent article on those who excuse terrorism. You were claiming how it's all the fault of the U.S. government, yada yada, essentially making excuses for mass murder. Click on the link and read the article, and then stop with the excuses, justifications, and rationalizations. We are at war, and if you hate America so much you are free to leave.

[shield]

Change immigration laws immediately. Our immigration is a disgrace.

[tpaine]

"Give it a rest. We are AT WAR. If you cannot act like a patriot, at least be smart enough to be silent."

Excellent advice. -- You jihad advocates are ignoring it & forum guidelines more than most.

Your hypocrisy knows no bounds.

[another1]

I did not condone either statement, but if you cannot see the difference between a generalization and the deliberate misquoting of an specific individual as a means of personal attack, you are beyond my ability to enlighten.

[another1]

BUT, they may well wait until the war is over.

And how will we know when "the war is over?"

[Roscoe]

"Late last night, amidst the carnage of lower Manhattan, an anonymous patriot raised a flag from a twisted lamppost. Beneath its watch, rescue workers toiled through the night, sorting through the wreckage of buildings and bodies...while members of the anti-government militia diligently hammered away at keyboards condemning the United States." --CWOJackson

[Mulder]

The problem with that is, once those liberties are removed due to war time, you face a very good chance of not having them returned to you. Certain measures need to be taken for sure. However, we need to be extremely cautious as to what we give up in the name of patriotism.

I agree totally.

As emotional as people are (rightfully so), we should be guided by reason and logic. People who are willing to surrender their rights are guided by emotion.

The proper response is the eradication of the enemy and the maintenance of all of our rights. The two are not mutually exclusive.

[riley1992]

God, what an immature child you are. Have you nothing better to do with your life than to attempt to incite arguments between people? Grow up.

[sc01]

Sadly a few buffoons with no understanding of the moral imperative carp.

you are being manipulted my friend - you have bought into the clintonista idea of total control. go ahead and surrender now, you will be no better off then under a taliban ruled government. we do not have to choose between freedom and safety WE MUST HAVE BOTH! secure our borders from terrorists and then go after muslim extremism with all the power of GOD wherever it exists until it is no more.

[NC_Libertarian]

But surely all freepers are aware of the massive amounts of legislation that does violate the constitution but that wasn't struck down (i.e. assault weapons ban, roe v. wade, etc.). I'm not confident at all in our government's restraint against passing unconstitutional measures, especially in a time when most Americans support it!

This week has been a horrible turn of events in more ways then people realize.

[kcvl]

Anyone have Mary Bono for a congresscritter?

When she returns to the Capitol she will prioritize support for measures that increase security at national landmarks, airports and other places. "The key here is to crack down. I think people are going to have to recognize that some of their conveniences are going to be gone," Bono said. "Whether we are talking about national ID cards I don’t know, or fingerprinting of everybody, I don’t know where we are going to go with security. I’m glad to show my identification where I need to go."

[Cato]

Sure. Let's deport anyone who has JIHAD in their handle.

You just got to be the enemy CJ. Why else take the name Jihad.

CATO

[BluesDuke]

The SCOTUS rejected much of FDR's programs.

Only in the very early going of the New Deal - thus provoking FDR's infamous scheme to "pack" the Court.

The centerpiece of the New Deal was delegation of lawmaking power from Congress to administrative agencies. Although the Supreme Court initially balked at extensive New Deal legislative delegations in cases dealing with poultry sales and oil shipments, the Court's resistance to legislative delegation soon dissipated under pressure from President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's court-packing initiative. - Paul Craig Roberts and Lawrence M. Stratton, from "Abdicating Legislative Power," in The Tyranny of Good Intentions: How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling The Constitution In The Name of Justice (New York: Forum Prima, 2000), p. 164-165.

[sc01]

No sir, I understand history and morals.

you understand NOTHING - you are playing right into the hands of domestic enemies who wish to disarm us! i will not allow you to sacrifice my family or children with your liberal views of freedom.