You might even go so far as to say, we are damned if we do and doomed if we do not.
Yes, suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus was one piece of legislation I had in mind when I made that post. Under the enforcement of that "temporary" legislation it is estimated that between 13,000 to 14,000 people were detained. Chief Justice Taney ruled the suspension unconstitutional but Lincoln just ignored him. I have a list of similar war time acts saved somewhere... lemme see if I can find it. :)
Like you, I'm not what you'd describe as a history buff either so I'm sure lots of other FReepers can/will add to this list and my comments. :) Its a FReeper thingie. LOL
Keeping in mind that government's first responsibility is to protect us and especially in times of war. Past administrations have imposed severe restrictons on our freedoms when we were at war.
John Adams:
Alien and Sedition Acts
In 1798-1799, the administraton and Congress became fearful of a French invasion, considered all French visitors or arriving refugees at least suspect if not actual spies. The acts gave government broad power to deport, impose fines or imprison anyone found guilty of saying, writing, publishing false or malicious statements against the government. It was a low point in our history and one that Thomas Jefferson labeled a 'reign of witches'. Needless to say there was much concern that the principles of our Revolution and the Constitution itself were being trampled on if not forsaken altogether.
Abraham Lincoln:
US Constitution, Section 9.2
When Lincoln suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus, often called the Bulwark of Liberty, he opened the door for an all out assault on, IMHO, our greatest and most cherished constitutional guarantee that of personal liberty. It was a frightening and unprecedented action and one a less skillful orator than Lincoln might never have persuaded Congress to accept. He was simultaneously called a defender of the union in some quarters and a dictator in others. The public had reason to fear. In Maryland, 31 members of the legislature were arrested in order to keep them from voting for secession. An Ohio Congressman was arrested in the middle of the night and thrown in jail for expressing what was deemed to be disloyal sentiments and speeches. The public outcry for his release so incensed Lincoln that he commuted the man's sentence from merely imprisonment to banishment from the Union. In another instance public outrage was more effective, after Gen. Grant expelled all Jews from the region under his command. The public pressure was so great he was forced to rescind that order. Lincoln's suspension of the "Great Writ" is generally thought to have made all other wide sweeping wartime legislation possible.
Woodrow Wilson
The Committee on Public Informaion
The Espionage Act
Trading with the Enemy Act
The U.S. Sedition Act (also called an amendment to the Espionage Act
The CPI, a precursor to the Espionage Act, basically promoted a kind of war frenzy whereby mere dissention became suspect. The Sedition Act was an amendment to the Espionage Act. Congress passed the Espionage Act ostensibly to prevent spying, but it was chiefly used to quell homegrown critics of WWI. As was apparently the case of Eugene Debs. Mr Debs, a socialist and a potential presidential candidate, was arrested and given a 10 yr prison sentence for making a speech that "obstructed recruiting". He appealed but his conviction was upheld in a unanimous Supreme Court opinion. As unimaginable as it seems you could be hauled into court for something as minor as criticizing the Red Cross or questioning war financing. Under the Sedition Act the mail was closed to publications espousing socialism or displaying an anti-government bias. Anyone who interfered with or obstructed the sale of U.S bonds, incited insubordination or similar acts advocating a slowdown in the production of goods essential to the war effort were subject to lengthy prison terms and heavy fines.
Franklin Roosevelt
Executive Order 9066
After the attack on Pearl Harbor the country feared the mainland U.S. might be next. In January of 1942 Roosevelt signed an order requiring all aliens to register with the government. The following month he signed the now infamous order authorizing expulsion of all persons of Japanese heritage from their homes on the West Coast. Some 70% of whom were U.S. Citizens. More than 100,000 people forced to leave on a week's notice, they were transported to relocation centers then sent to barbed wire enclosed camps patrolled by armed guards. There they stayed until 1946. Upon release many returned home to find their property badly damaged by vandals and some had lost everything. They had not committed any crime, had not spoken out against the government their imprisonment was based solely on their ancestry. Although their incarceration has become controversal in recent years to some, most did not feel it an unreasonable measure at the time.
IMHO, if we are to judge by history, and we must, there is no basis to expect that future wartime restraints on our individual liberties will be any different. Nor is it necessarily desirable or even remotely likely that civil liberty will hold as cherished a position in wartime as it does in peacetime. That does not mean we must be silent or that our laws do not apply but rather that in times of war the government speaks with a somewhat different voice and it must be heard, it must take precedent.
As outrageous or unconstitutional as past restrictions appear in retrospect, it is important to keep in mind that they were imposed in order to protect and defend our freedom even though at the time there was no compelling evidence of a credible, subversive threat within our own borders. However, 9-11 confirmed that we now have such a presence and the threat is without historical parallel. We have no choice but to confront that harsh reality. The current administration cannot and will not shirk it's first priority for to do so places the lives of hundreds of thousands of American civilians at risk. I have no doubt that every thoughtful consideration has been given to the measures that must be taken and that more are, indeed, likely. In the past those considerations have had no bearing on our freedoms during times of peace, in each case when the threat had subsided our liberties were restored. I see no reason to suspect that this time will be any different.