I have said on this list before that it is not always possible to have
absolute freedom and absolute protection. (and no, we don't have to debate
the use of the word "absolute" here)
Unfortunately, civil liberties and security always maintain a perfect
balance, there is never a gain in one without losing something in the other.
Take the face recognition software for example, unbelievably, people are
still opposed to this. But yet these same people demand that the US
government protect them from terrorist. They can't have it both ways. I
still maintain the position that if you are not a wanted criminal (or
terrorist), then you have nothing to fear from this system.
The debate rages on about the government monitoring email and net traffic.
Again I say, if you are not doing anything wrong, then who cares if your
email or instant messages are scanned? If they are only scanning for
suspected terrorist activity and connections, then you have nothing to worry
about.
When the government starts making moral judgments about your email and
surfing habits, then they have gone too far and you have something to
complain about.
Personally, I am willing to give up some of my "perceived" freedoms to
protect my children and the ones I love from more terrorist attacks. I am
sure that there are those out there that would disagree with this, but I am
also sure that there are 7000+ people's families and friends in New York and
worldwide that WOULD agree with this.
I think that the ACLU is a good thing. But I also think that they tend to go
to extremes to prove their point. Let me ask this, is the ACLU going to step
up to the plate and defend the civil liberties of suspected terrorists? Is
the ACLU (or anyone for that matter) going to complain if any terrorist
attacks are stopped as a result of increased government monitoring that they
oppose? Is anyone going to complain about the government holding suspected
terrorists and material witnesses for an indefinite amount of time while
they investigate? Of course not.
I get really annoyed at the comparisons people make of national ID cards and
increased surveillance to the Third Reich or other similar organizations. It
is not an "apples to apples" comparison. John put it very nicely in another
post:
>This surprise attack against unarmed civilians
>is completely unprecedented in the annals of
>world history.
At this point, two weeks after the terrorist attacks, you have to ask
yourself what is more important, freedom or security? Guess what, terrorist
in the US at this very moment have the very same freedoms that we do. Are
you willing to temporarily give up some of those freedoms to help ensure the
safety of your family and children? If you are not, I think that I would be
worried.
<stepping off of my soapbox>
Gary
___________________________________________
Gary L. Nunn
Delaware Ohio
"...speak your mind - even if your voice shakes..."
- Maggie Kuhn
