Tolerance..?

[brucew]

responding to terrorism

i have truly enjoyed the spirited discussion regarding the topic. please don't forget the loss of life in pennsylvania. it would appear that some people on that flight practiced violence against the terrorists and who knows how many lives were saved!!?? i fail to understand how people can take a nonviolent approach to this. it would seem to me that these fundamentalists truly respect military strength and a willingness to fight to the death for a cause. thomas jefferson wrote"the price of freedom is eternal vigilance" as a country we have not been vigilant for decades!! i would just agree with those who have talked about political correctness and ACLU how this has not represented the avarage rank and file american!! since we have not been vigilant in securing our freedoms we are now paying a price for that indifference. i absolutely enjoy the liberal media and politicians having to agree that we may need the military... !!!!!

 

[BK]

Bruce your are soo right on your points.



And on your 2nd general point, you are soo right again...

... shame on us for forgetting, in these conversations, those AMERICANs on the flight that crashed in PA and what they did to save soo many other lifes in true AMERICAN spirit!



Their goal was to gain control of the plane and not let the terrorists succeed in doing what they had just found out happened minutes before to the other flights.

Those AMERICANs succeeded.



I had heard talk of them getting the highest "medal of honor" (not sure what it's called) that could be bestowed on a civilian... any more words on that?



Bob

 

[nps]

BK,



Do you think the hijackers in Pennsylvania got the presumption of innocence and the due process afforded them by the Constitution? Aren't we assuming all the hijackers were actually guilty before their posthumous trial?



I can be just as ridiculous as some of the others on these boards.



It isn't about taking away liberties or freedoms. It isn't about internment camps. It's about allowing temporary latitude in dealing with certain questionable people. When the threat is gone so will the latitude.



I'm glad AG Ashcroft is pursuing this issue. It is a TEMPORARY problem that could cost more Americans their lives at home. Seems most dissenters would rather discuss principles that are meaningless at this point in time rather than the real world and true example I started the thread with.

 

[BK]

Neil,

I couldn't agree with you more. Not sure if some of my meaning was minced in my terrible writting style.....



I feel that some of what the US has done in history pushed the limits of what the US could do "legally"... but I believe it needed to be done to accomplish what needed to be accomplished.

I believe the same will happen today... .



Different problems need different solutions.

If our rules "don't allow us" to implement those solutions, what are we suposed todo, roll over as a nation, give up and play dead... HE!! NO.



In the past when it was made public what the US had done things that "weren't so right"... , the US said it was "sorry" later, as others have pointed out. . by paying lots of monies to those who sued...

But how much more "money" or lives would it have costed the US if those "not so right" actions had not been taken by bending certain liberties.



Sometimes the means are justified by the end results, whether the bleeding PC's want to hear it or not.

Again, it's easier the ask forgiveness, than it is to ask permission.





Bob

 

[Bill Lins]

Tolerance? Sorry, fresh out.