Sure, all these added “security measures” like dumping out fluids at airports and the larger general disregard of privacy and constitutional rights are a real pain, but at least people can’t fly airplanes into tall buildings in New York anymore.
Oh, wait, they still can.
Luckily this one wasn’t piloted by people who actually intended to do some damage, because if it were, it could have easily been loaded with quite a lot of explosives and there isn’t a thing we could have done to stop it. Unfortunately, I think that point will continue to be lost on those who favor the loss of liberty for the sake of perceived security, as the saying goes.
22 Comments
You’re walking a fine line there.
One thing I’d like to point out about this whole incident and this post, I don’t think the terrorists are going to do any more airplane acts. Not that it’s too hard but a huge bomb in a crowded event like the world series or a football game would be worse. I’d also give them a little credit in thinking that a hijacked plane or flown plane full of bombs doesn’t make the “terror” any worse.
What line is that?
I’m not saying they will try to use the same method again; I’ve always said that I doubt they will. I’m just trying to make the point of how futile all the stuff we’ve been told we have to live with lately is.
Personally, I’ve always believed that’s exactly why they chose the method of attack that they did in the 9/11 attacks; specifically not using any conventional weapons, etc. I think it was to make the point that if people are really commited to doing stuff like this it’s going to happen.
I think you should say “perceived liberty” as well as “perceived security.” These things you talk about are all temporal, and all irrelevant in light of eternity. True liberty is not gained through the governments of man.
Enlightenment does not come from understanding the intricacies of the workings of our physical world, but by understanding and communication the reality of our spiritual existence.
Of course, in the context of that quote (from Franklin or whoever actually said it first, since there seems to be some dispute on that matter), the kind of liberty being discussed is the freedoms that a governmental system is designed to provide and protect for its citizens.
Is there a “higher” freedom or liberty than that? Of course; many of us believe that, and that kind of “true” liberty will always be available to people regardless of what government they live under.
However, that doesn’t mean that we, as citizens of the particular country that we live in, shouldn’t value and defend the former type just because we will always have the latter type.
Rather, I think the fact that we have “true” freedom in the spiritual sense should only serve to inspire us to be a positive influence in every area that is available to us. IMO, we should find our peace (and “true security”) in our spiritual existence, and from that point be secure and confident in living out the things we believe in the real world, in every area of our lives.
To make a hard line distinction between the spiritual world and the physical is not very productive in my book, since as humans we are inextricably tied to both. Spiritual matters affect physical and vice versa. I don’t think they’re separate; I think they coexist, and there’s no evidence that suggests that will ever be different, even in eternity. (new heaven AND new earth, etc.)
The line:
Using death as a method to get a point across, very similar to the fear politics of the right.
The point of limited liberty will always be an issue, no matter what extent it is.
No evidence. Ha. Untenable.
Some random few thoughts:
I was in New York this weekend.
Glad I wasn’t there for the accident/event as
many I know have an elevated concern about terrorism in the area.
Helicopters don’t have to notify the FAA
with a flight plan. So that could be
a big problem.
Going through airport security wasn’t a big problem. They let me keep my visine.
Frank Gar. was on one of the flights coming back to LA.
see how I advoided all that left/right discussion.
Dave: congrats! - although how will your comment count ever start to rise again unless we get into those heated discussions?
Just kidding, I’m following your example and not looking to do that sort of thing anymore.
Dan & Dave: I hope that this issue can be considered outside of the political boxes of “left” and “right”, despite the efforts of politicians on both sides to do otherwise. I think that a lot of people can find common ground in the preservation of civil liberties, regardless of their political preferences.
Dan: While I agree that the current administration has currently used the 9/11 situation as leverage in pushing the acceptance of their policies, I don’t think they have an exclusive grasp on the use of fear tactics. It’s a method/tool of controlling other people that predates our political parties and our country itself. I, on the other hand, am not trying to scare anyone; quite the opposite, actually. Learning from a death (or deaths) can be a positive thing too, but in this case I’m not really referring to the death so much as the plane crash incident, just as an example.
Nate: I’m unclear what your comment is referencing, but I think the only time I said “no evidence” was in my last comment, in reference to the inability for us as humans to completely separate spiritual and physical life. If that’s what you’re talking about, I can’t think of any spiritual activity that we can participate in that isn’t somehow related to the physical world, but I could just be not thinking of an obvious example, which is completely likely.
I’m just being stinky, but the statement you made (NO evidence) assumes that are aware of all of the evidence and are also aware of all ways in which the evidence has been interpreted to suggest given outcomes of the physical world. A small impossibility if you are limiting the conversation to the Bible and a huge impossibility if not. It’s like when Kristen says I NEVER do the laundry but that’s totally not true because I did a load in August 2001. Anyways, I’m not totally sure what I think about the state of a persons eternal existence but I am pretty sure I think it is significantly different then the physical reality we now know. Otherwise, I pretty much totally agree with you in the comment I’m picking on and I’m not saying anything solid so … and single engine airplanes will always be able to fly into random buildings, especially close to an airport, but getting enough explosives and an appropriately sized aircraft to deliver them and do significant damage would be the hard part of your plan.
Cool. Yeah, I probably shouldn’t have said “no evidence”, or at least added “no evidence that I can think of right now”.
Of course, I’d agree that the state of our eternal existence will eventually be dramatically different than how we currently live today, but I was just saying I don’t think it will be completely non-physical, and I think the Bible backs that up. I guess that whole thing is kind of a tangent anyway, so it’s no big deal.
I should probably also clarify (for the sake of the government eavsdroppers out there) that the situation I described is in no way “my plan”, just one possibility among many others which would probably be a lot easier to pull off and wouldn’t involve airplanes, but none of which would I ever claim as “mine”.
Thank goodness. I was starting to worry. I was about to order a body scan machine for next time you guys come over.
i think you’re missing the government’s reason for all this security. they just don’t want arabs flying planes into buildings, just like the communists before, and the japanese before that, etc. i have confindence that our government will always protect the rights of the rich and famous to destroy themselves as well as public and private property.
JB, thanks.
I am concerned about my comment count.
Pro civil liberties for everyone except certain people groups that the recent terrorists are a part of.
jk.
Friends in NY don’t feel safe. 9 11 is very fresh on their minds. Some NYers will riot and many arab people will be targeted in the city if there is a 2nd attack in that area.
Many rioted during a power blackout, some died. The police couldn’t handle it and it was bad.
One friend said that everywhere you look companies are pushing 3 day home and office disaster kits. The power company keyspan was promoting the “get ready for a disaster” kits and supplies. My friend’s son asked if “they ( government )” knew something and was getting everyone ready.
My comment count lead over the remainder of the comment list is worthy to maintain. I used to be ranked above nathan.
Liberty is a fluid dynamic concept in any society.
Yeah, I think the government does “know something”; they know that it’s easy to control people who are living in fear by offering them safety, whether it’s real safety or not.
This particular incident was an accident.
Control ??? Do you feel controlled by the gov.?
And Keyspan power of NY is hardly a conservative org. they support the liberal causes on LI.
I’m not suggesting this incident wasn’t an accident at all.
I don’t feel controlled by the government, because I don’t buy into that load of crap they’re trying to sell us, telling us they need to “control” us more by restricting our civil liberties in the name of security. Unfortunately a lot of people still are buying it, and calling those that don’t “unpatriotic”, “terrorist sympathizers”, etc.
I don’t know anything about Keyspan, so I haven’t commented about them at all.
Good, if you did feel controlled then that would suck.
I do feel manipulated at times by both political parties and media and try to fight it by not buying what the mainstream NY, LA Times self proclaimed ” intelligencia ” BS network news is selling.
Haven’t heard about the “unpatriotic/terrorists sympathizer ” pitch.
Groups and people are plotting ways to kill innocent Americans on our soil. I hope the government is doing something about it.
I have few rights in Mexico, foreign agents who are here in the US with the sole purpose of terror have zero rights in my opinion.
I think the US government has had a long history of circumventing some laws that are there for peaceful times, because they look at as if we are at war, with certain groups( not advocating it just talking about it, i.e. Clinton and the Branch Davidians )and the rules and liberties are different in wartime.
This has been going on since at least WWII.
Keyspan is the power supplier for LI.
But there are significant problems with that justification.
(1) The rights of everyone are being infringed, not JUST terrorists. It would be nice if they wore labels so you could tell who’s who, but that isn’t going to happen. Also, I think that most rights that we enjoy in this country should be considered human rights, not American rights. “All men (not just all americans) were created equal, and endowed with certain inalienable rights…” When people are thrown in prison without trial or even a formal charge (meaning that they have not been proven to be “terrorists”), and kept there for years and sometimes tortured, I think it’s an outrage whether they’re american citizens or not. Many of the “evil” regimes that we oppose do the same thing (lock up people whenever they feel like it, without proving they’ve done anything wrong) and we speak out against it; I say we should hold ourselves to the same standards.
(2) The huge problem with allowing for the suspension of civil liberties in a “time of war”, especially in this case, is that we aren’t in a traditional war. We could debate whether it would be OK even if we were, but it’s irrelevant because the “war on terror” (much like the “war on drugs”) will never be over, so I’m most definitely not OK with accepting those limitations during “wartime”.
Non - US Citizens don’t legally have US Citizen rights, which is the same in most countries.
Not justifing it or allowing it-”the suspension of certain rights in time of war”, just reporting it as a cause.
If this was a normal war with countries adhering to standards put in place by the geneva convention where soldiers wear uniforms and other combatants who don’t are killed immediately as spys or sabotaurs, the civil
liberties would be clearly outlined as to what is and what isn’t going to be allowed.
Since, combatants who are killing are disgused as civilians and target civilians that would argue for a review of our current rules of war and engagement, IMHO.
torture? - that drum has been overplayed and zero evidence has come out.
So it’s OK to treat people poorly, including locking them up without charge or trial and torturing them, as long as they aren’t wearing uniforms? I don’t think so. But you point to another huge difference in this so-called “war” - the “enemy combatants” aren’t necessarily armed or “combating” anything, it’s just whoever we just to throw that label on, they can be carted away and never heard from or given a chance to refute the charges.
It’s pointless to argue about the torture issue. If the photographic evidence and numerous eyewitness accounts and secret detention facilities in countries which allow torture aren’t enough to convince you, then perhaps the fact that the administration actively opposes every single bill that would in any way restrict activities of interrogators, even brutal methods.