From the Right

Observing my upside down America

Liberty Is Not For Sissies

with 4 comments


This is not the correct driving behavior.

Recently, I was conversing with The Vermont Farmer about issues he has against the Republican Party. He had made reference to GOP policies he viewed as “extreme”. As the conversation evolved, he mentioned the Patriot Act and said “Liberty is not for sissies”, calling it “risky business”. He’s right, and it got me to thinking.

When I was learning to drive, my dad was in the right seat and I used the horn for some reason I don’t remember. From the reaction of my dad, my reason for using it apparently wasn’t warranted. He simply said to me, “If you’re driving the car correctly, you’ll never need that horn.” It took a few seconds for that to sink in, but it did. He was right.



Here’s another one from my brother. He once got ticked-off when the ATMs started to show up. I asked why and he said, ” ‘They’ can track you. ‘They’ know that at that moment, you are there at that machine pulling money out of your account.” Falling back on my horn-lesson, I retorted with something like “So what? If you’re behaving properly, who cares who knows where you happen to be?” He only said something like “That’s not right. That’s intrusion.” I thought then and today continue to think it’s a very weak argument. The bank and authorities could “intrude” upon my withdrawal habits long before the advent of ATMs.

Smile, you're being surveilled.





Today, we see that ATMs and camera’s have turned out to be a valuable tool for law-enforcement making our society a safer one in that it helps authorities apprehend the perpetrator quicker.



Liberty isn’t for sissies, which is to say we have to be willing to stomach the actions of those who take their rights of liberties too far by robbing, killing and destroying.

The game has changed.


Today we live in a world where we have a stateless enemy we like to call “radical Muslims”. (Which is a joke, but that’s another topic) I won’t go into the reasons, but we know they have avowed to kill Americans from any quarter and in as many numbers as possible. They have demonstrated their mission on numerous occasions in our country and abroad. It is a hard fact.



If we know we have a stateless enemy who is submerged into our society, we would be irresponsible to wait for them to attack a refinery or another high-rise as in the recent case in Dallas (given simulated explosive and detonator which they pushed). That was stopped only because of broad surveillance methodologies. Many lives and millions of dollars in property were saved. They are now in jail.


You and I were never targeted by those surveillance methodologies. Know why?


We behaved properly.



My acceptance of these methodologies isn’t easy. It’s a hard choice for me, but it is also easy to see the price for not choosing this position is very, very high. Too high. Liberty is at stake. I will not tolerate another event on the scale of 9/11 and I am willing to be surveilled to avoid that. As I said, liberty isn’t for sissies and as we see, it’s a double-edged sword. To enjoy our liberty we have to be willing to make some hard choices. It isn’t going to be pretty, either.



In this video, Gingrich classifies America’s anti-terror strategy as weak.

Advertisements

Written by Ben

November 17, 2009 at 11:45 am

Posted in Liberty, Politics

Tagged with ,

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Liberty means relying on yourself, not the government.

    Elric66

    November 17, 2009 at 3:27 pm

  2. Yep – and I don’t trust them to protect me or my family. Fort Hood proved that very dramatically. Congressman Peter Hoekstra, Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, calls the intelligence agency’s failure to act on the information at hand as a “systematic failure”.

    Perhaps they feared they would have appeared to be trampling upon civil liberties. I can hear the argument now; “He was only talking about Islam and exhibited a ‘conscious objector’ mind-set. There’s no harm in that, really. There’s plenty of precedent to support that.”

    This time, there were over 50 casualties. It only serves to make me wonder about what it will be next time.

    Ben

    November 17, 2009 at 3:48 pm

  3. You’re right. What happened at Fort Hood had nothing to do with being tolerant and instead had to do with being ignorant, passive, and cowardly. Clear signs of a nanny society that are wrong on so many levels.

    Those same nannies see “liberties” as something only the “have nots” should have, and they set out to make everyone a victim but the victims themselves.

    Vern R. Kaine

    November 17, 2009 at 9:51 pm

  4. A “radical” muslim is a muslim who is tolerant and peaceful.

    Elric66

    November 18, 2009 at 3:55 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: