Skip to comments.
Things We Lost in the Fire: (The Assault on the Constitution)
Village Voice ^
| September 11 - 17, 2002
| Alisa Solomon
Posted on 09/10/2002 11:34:06 AM PDT by dead
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-36 next last
1
posted on
09/10/2002 11:34:07 AM PDT
by
dead
To: dead
10, 9, 8, 7...
2
posted on
09/10/2002 11:36:18 AM PDT
by
malakhi
To: dead
To: dead
.....if only they hadn't opened the cockpit doors.
kj
4
posted on
09/10/2002 11:43:21 AM PDT
by
AzJP
To: dead
The alarmist are in full gag mode. The only other response would have been to smile, shrug our shoulders and embrace diversity.Bush would have been reemed for that too.
Better that we take strong action then bitch slap each other for our "insensitivities" later.
5
posted on
09/10/2002 11:44:46 AM PDT
by
zarf
To: zarf
"Liberty is the most precious gift we offer our citizens."
Asscroft also said: "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"
It's clear: the government is using 9/11 as an excuse to impose an imperial tyranny, while doing absolutely nothing for our security (notice the open borders).
6
posted on
09/10/2002 11:53:16 AM PDT
by
billybudd
To: dead
It's so nice that the left now feels secure enough to crawl out of their hiding places, change their underpaints, and return to doing what they love to do most -- Hating America.
Of course, if there is another terrorist incident, they will be the ones who are whimpering and crying, "Why didn't the government protect me".
To: dead
I'll read this as soon as I see that the author has also written and published an equally-scathing article about the attacks on the
Second Amendment. Not to mention the Ninth and Tenth.
Till then this sounds like so much disingenuous tripe.
To: billybudd
Lost liberty? I can still go out and smoke pot. I can still punch out a cop if want to. I will pay a proce if I'm caught doing the former or arrested after doing the latter, but I'm still free.
9
posted on
09/10/2002 12:00:44 PM PDT
by
zarf
To: dead
Search for: immigrant
First, They Came for the Immigrants . . .
In immigrant communities,
sharpened their teeth on immigrants
Civil libertarians, immigrant advocates,
thousands of immigrants were swept up
Muslim, Arab, and South Asian immigrants under
Search for: illegal
nor even a good hunch, that anything illegal is afoot.
even when there's no illegal activity.
Once again, a writer with a valid point to make ruins the whole piece by ignoring the elephant in the middle of the room.
10
posted on
09/10/2002 12:01:08 PM PDT
by
m1911
To: Dr. Frank
Your first paragraph renders your second paragraph meaningless.
11
posted on
09/10/2002 12:01:51 PM PDT
by
dead
To: dead
Your first paragraph renders your second paragraph meaningless. Ok whatever you say. Has the author defend the Second Amendment yet? Let me know.
To: Dr. Frank
She hasn't commented on the Red Sox or solar flares either, but that has nothing to do with the points she did address.
13
posted on
09/10/2002 12:04:53 PM PDT
by
dead
To: Joe Brower
The Bill of Rights wasn't cancelled. It was turned into a "living document" and redefined out of existence.
14
posted on
09/10/2002 12:05:08 PM PDT
by
Eala
To: zarf
Bump!
15
posted on
09/10/2002 12:06:18 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: m1911
I agree with your point.
Also, legal or illegal, non-US citizens are not accorded the same rights as US citizens.
Their right to remain in this nation is subject to approval of our government, which answers to the US citizenry.
But her points about the trampling of the rights of US citizens are valid.
16
posted on
09/10/2002 12:07:20 PM PDT
by
dead
To: dead
She hasn't commented on the Red Sox or solar flares either, but that has nothing to do with the points she did address. She is pretending to suddenly care about the Constitution. The Second Amendment (you may not be aware) is a part of the Constitution. So you bet your a** that whether she has ever defended the Second Amendment has to do with whether she is being disingenuous (which is what I am accusing her of).
To: Dr. Frank
You also stated that you didn't even read the article, so why the hell are you commenting on her arguments?
18
posted on
09/10/2002 12:09:07 PM PDT
by
dead
To: dead
You also stated that you didn't even read the article No I didn't.
To: Dr. Frank
Ditto!
20
posted on
09/10/2002 12:11:34 PM PDT
by
m1911
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-36 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson