Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Even Ben Franklin might be confused

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Franklin:
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

Condi Rice:
"You can't allow somebody to commit the crime before you detain them, because if they commit the crime, thousands of innocent people die," she told the USA Today daily.
"We have never fought a war like this before," she said referring to the global war on terrorism.


If Franklin could return for a brief visit, wonder if he'd revisit his famous quote in light of WMDs and Islamofascists? The issue of security versus liberty is perhaps the most vexing side effect to result from 9/11. I suppose Ben might be just as vexed as the rest of us.

Don't throw me in the heap of those cheerleading the Patriot Act or other security measures, it's more like cautious pragmatism. Who wants a security-police state? But who wants law enforcement to trail people like Mohammed Atta or Ramzi Yousef, waiting until they set off the attack before rounding them up? The moderm potential for damage seems to partially trump Franklin's quip.

Finding the correct balance appears incredibly difficult. We've seen two paths used these past 12 years, the Clinton law enforcement approach and the Bush CIA round-em-up secret detention approach. The score is plain to see, however it's the long term consequences and potential for abuse that worries people.

Events like this are bound to increase:

That Monday, when a guard asked if she had her ID with her, Davis just said, "Yes."

"And he said, 'May I see it?' " she recalled, "and I said no."

The guard told her she had to leave the bus, but she refused. Two officers with the Federal Protective Service were called.

"I boarded the bus and spoke with the individual, Deborah N. Davis . . . asking why she was refusing," wrote the first Federal Protective Service officer in an incident report posted on Scannell's Web site. The officer was not identified.

"She explained she did not have to give up her rights and present identification," the officer wrote. "I informed her she was entering a federal facility and that the regulations for entrance did require her to present identification, before being allowed access."

"She became argumentative and belligerent at this time," the officer wrote.

Eventually, one officer said, "Grab her," and the two officers took hold of her arms and removed her from the bus, Davis said.


Comparing her to Rosa Parks is just plain ole moonbat propaganda, but take a closer look. How many of us might be tempted to do the same thing, especially since the woman was riding a CITY bus passing through the federal facility and she was bound for a stop on the other side? There is something heroic in defying the man-- our nation began that way.

My pragmatic side says the Arvada transit system could have prevented this by not allowing such a route to exist, and that's the way I'd approach this. But nevertheless the woman was still confronted. How do we fight terrorism without trampling individual liberty?

Some are more fatalist and say the final solution is unavoidable, that we're on course to an eventual Biblical prophecy summed up in the Revelation. I say God gave us the ability to think and reason, and we shouldn't just give up. In a world of bad men and horrible weapons, we need good men with new ideas.

No comments: