(no subject)
Sep. 12th, 2003 07:57 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sophiaserpentiaWho is more likely to destroy the essence of what the U.S. stands for?
People who hijack planes and destroy buildings, killing several thousand people in the process,
or
A President who refers to civil rights as "unreasonable obstacles?"
or
Both, if they are allowed to run roughshod throughout the world, unopposed by people of compassion and conscience?
People who hijack planes and destroy buildings, killing several thousand people in the process,
or
A President who refers to civil rights as "unreasonable obstacles?"
or
Both, if they are allowed to run roughshod throughout the world, unopposed by people of compassion and conscience?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-09-12 06:53 am (UTC)Bush has made himself an accomplice to the terrorists. Perhaps it would bemore accurate to say that he has made them his accomplices.
no subject
Date: 2003-09-12 07:22 am (UTC)Yes, those unreasonable obstacles (i.e., civil rights) were long ago removed from prosecuting any drug related offense, due to media driven hysteria over the dangers of drugs utweighing the benefits of freedom. So why wouldn't he demand those freedoms be removed from any terror suspects?
And then, why not demand they be removed from any crime suspects? After all, violent criminals surely don't deserve rights... and then why should any criminal deserve rights? Surely the writers of the Constitution never foresaw such a dangerous world! They would happily have left out all that messy stuff like habeas corpus and cruel and unusual punishment if they knew it would lead to police officers standing by helpless to stop the overwhelming tide of drug addicts and terrorists that are taking over our country!
no subject
Date: 2003-09-12 07:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-12 10:35 am (UTC)Definitely Both.
But without people like Bush, and their foreign policies, the first may never have happened.
no subject
Date: 2003-09-12 11:01 am (UTC)Bush has only accelerated the corporate tyranny that's been building up for decades.
no subject
Date: 2003-09-12 11:04 am (UTC)I'm sure it would have happened sooner or later, truth be told.
If it had not come from Al Queda, it would have come from somewhere else.
no subject
Date: 2003-09-12 12:03 pm (UTC)In a sense it already did, in Oklahoma City. But to see that of course you have to take a wider view.
no subject
Date: 2003-09-12 12:09 pm (UTC)If you looks through the last 100 years of our history... there are many small acts of terrorism that have occured in this country.
It just took a larger one, such as 9/11 to make the public realize what was happening. (and the help the government take advantage of it... but I digress...)
no subject
Date: 2003-09-12 06:18 pm (UTC)