Assalamu aleikum.

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security,
deserve neither liberty or security."

- Benjamin Franklin


---


U.S. strips more freedom from citizens than terrorists ever could
Roger Duncan
Roanoke Times
Saturday, August 06, 2005
http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/commentary%5C29015.html

Duncan, of Blacksburg, is an electro-optic engineer.

As I write these words, I'm sitting at a crowded gate at the Los
Angeles airport awaiting the redeye to Roanoke. I've just gone through
security screening, and I've rarely felt so violated. After waiting in
line for 25 minutes to check in, I'm told I have to wait again for my
bag to be X-rayed. Another 25 minutes.

Given the amount of free time I had, I decided to spend some of it
contemplating what a thoroughly useless gesture the X-ray screening
is. I understand the purpose is to prevent bombs from finding their
way onto planes through checked bags, but the chances of actually
detecting a bomb from someone who seriously wants to blow up an
airplane must surely be minuscule. But I digress.

No doubt, its real intention is to make travelers feel better,
subsidized by the taxpayers to the tune of God knows how much.

After clearing the X-ray line, it gets interesting. My boarding pass
and ID are checked before proceeding to security. Then, they're
checked again by someone 15 feet away from the first checkpoint who
saw me get checked the first time. Weird.

Then, the actual line for personal screening. Remove the laptop from
its case. Simply can't risk it blowing up. When it's finally my turn
to walk through the metal detector, the gentleman in charge of waving
people through politely reminds me that it's recommended that I remove
my shoes.

Then, he reminds me again. I respond, "Yes, I heard you." Another
warning, this time less polite, "We strongly recommend you remove your
shoes, sir!" Again, I respond, "I understand." I walk through the
metal detector uneventfully.

But my friend hasn't forgotten my impertinence. "Now you've done it.
You get to go through the special line!" The special line consisted of
five solid minutes of probing with wands, patting down, spread this
way, turn that way, etc. And I still had to take my shoes off. So, I
guess what they mean when they say that shoe removal is recommended is
that it's required. Bizarre. They should just say that. It would've
spared me a public probing that I could live without.

So, this is the legacy of 9/11. This is part of our fearsome response
to the terrorists. We'll inconvenience them. Doubly so if they don't
remove their shoes. The point of this rambling essay, and I can assure
you it does have one, isn't that one average Joe couldn't be bothered
to take his shoes off. It's the whole security versus freedom issue.
How can we legitimately claim that we're preserving freedom when our
response to terrorism is the exactly opposite of that?

After the collapse of the twin towers, our Congress, in a patriotic
fervor (more exactly described as a mad panic), passed sweeping
legislation that did more to strip away freedom from the American
people than 1,000 flying bombs. The Patriot Act. The very name is cynical.

One observation I've made is how frequently we Americans confuse
security and freedom. Here's an example.

The war in Iraq was justified by claims that Saddam had weapons of
mass destruction and he might use them on us, or he might give them to
terrorists to use on us.

Neglecting for a moment the morphing nature of the justification for
the war, we were, and are, daily informed that our soldiers over there
are fighting for our freedom.

In fact, this isn't true. They're fighting for our security, and even
the truth of that is dubious at best. The only time a war becomes
about preserving the freedom of a nation is when the nation is in some
way threatened with the loss of said freedom.

Despite his presumed madness and regardless of the number of WMD he
did or didn't have, Saddam didn't have the power to remove a single
iota of freedom from any American. No action he could take could
conceivably result in a loss of freedom. There was never even the
slightest of chances that we would see an Iraqi invasion force land on
our shores.

Now, one may be able to argue that his remaining in power
hypothetically threatened Americans. But taking someone's life and
taking someone's freedom are two different things. Saddam could only
kill me; he couldn't take my freedom. So logically, it isn't freedom
that our troops are fighting for, but security. But I suppose that
makes a somewhat less poetic rallying cry.

Now, the president is a different story. He can actually take away a
great deal of my freedom. And boy, has he been busy!

Ironic that we're actually called to sacrifice portions of our freedom
for the Patriot Act, and the justification is that it preserves
freedom. Talk about Orwellian.

Bush and his cronies are therefore, logically, the real enemies of
freedom. Lest you think me a member of the John Kerry fan club, I
think it's fair to say that there are no greater enemies of freedom
than the liberals. I just think that, in this case, ol' W is giving
them a run for their money.

So, let's be honest with ourselves in this debate. Let's not lie and
proclaim "Give me liberty or give me death!" when what we really mean
is "I'm a coward; I surrender the freedoms my forefathers died for in
order to save my miserable hide!" Is that not, after all, exactly what
we mean?

"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell, "1984."

http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/commentary%5C29015.html








***************************************************************************
{Invite (mankind, O Muhammad ) to the Way of your Lord (i.e. Islam) with wisdom 
(i.e. with the Divine Inspiration and the Qur'an) and fair preaching, and argue 
with them in a way that is better. Truly, your Lord knows best who has gone 
astray from His Path, and He is the Best Aware of those who are guided.} 
(Holy Quran-16:125)

{And who is better in speech than he who [says: "My Lord is Allah (believes in 
His Oneness)," and then stands straight (acts upon His Order), and] invites 
(men) to Allah's (Islamic Monotheism), and does righteous deeds, and says: "I 
am one of the Muslims."} (Holy Quran-41:33)
 
The prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "By Allah, if 
Allah guides one person by you, it is better for you than the best types of 
camels." [al-Bukhaaree, Muslim] 

The prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)  also said, "Whoever 
calls to guidance will have a reward similar to the reward of the one who 
follows him, without the reward of either of them being lessened at all." 
[Muslim, Ahmad, Aboo Daawood, an-Nasaa'ee, at-Tirmidhee, Ibn Maajah] 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

All views expressed herein belong to the individuals concerned and do not in 
any way reflect the official views of IslamCity unless sanctioned or approved 
otherwise. 

If your mailbox clogged with mails from IslamCity, you may wish to get a daily 
digest of emails by logging-on to http://www.yahoogroups.com to change your 
mail delivery settings or email the moderators at [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the 
title "change to daily digest".  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/islamcity/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to