Reply With Quote
Yes, I am proud to be an American. One reason for me is freedom of the press. Another reason is that the President is not above the law.
I debated if I should start a new thread with this column from Mr. Sowell,
or should I have included it in the NYT thread. But it has two other aspects
to it that made me decide on a separate thread. One about the Roman
Empire and citizenship and that so many no longer are proud of what they
are. Americans!
Anyhow I found this a very good read I hope you enjoy it and take heed
of some of his thoughts.
Is patriotism obsolete?
By Thomas Sowell
Friday, July 7, 2006
On the eve of a holiday that used to stir patriotic emotions -- the Fourth of July -- it has been painful to see examples of how little remains of that glue that holds a society together.
Perhaps the worst of these signs of national disintegration was the New York Times' recent revealing to the whole world the covert methods by which the American government has been tracking the money that finances international terrorism.
The usual excuses about "the public's right to know" ring even more hollow than usual in this case. The public was not dying to know the methods by which their lives were being safeguarded. Only the terrorists were helped by these revelations.
Americans may in fact be dying literally now because of what the terrorists have been told -- and ultimately because a jerk inherited the New York Times. As usual, the mainstream media circled the wagons around one of their own. The media spin is that the terrorists were already bound to know that we were monitoring their international transfers of money. The Times says terrorists had to "suspect" this.
This is an all-or-nothing argument. There are vast numbers of terrorists around the world and not all of them are affiliated with the same organizations. Nor is there any reason to believe that they all have the same level of knowledge or sophistication.
Whatever knowledge or su ions some of the terrorist leaders may have had about American surveillance of the money transfers that finance their operations, that does not mean that all the terrorists knew about all the methods or about all the countries that were cooperating to track them down by their money trails.
After all, so many of these terrorists would not have been captured or killed if they were infallible.
The media may not publicize the casualties we inflict on the terrorists but they are vastly greater than the casualties that terrorists inflict on Americans, even though too many in the media focus almost exclusively on the latter.
Not only do the terrorists now know how they are being tracked, some of the countries that have secretly helped in that tracking may now back off from helping, now that the New York Times' revelations can create internal political problems or fear of terrorist retaliation in those countries.
The all-or-nothing idea that secrets are either secret from everybody or secret from nobody will not stand up under scrutiny. Back during World War II, the Chicago Tribune made the devastating revelation that the United States had broken the Japanese code and could read their military plans in advance.
This was an enormously important secret, especially during the early days of the war, when Japan had overwhelming naval superiority in the Pacific and was seeking to destroy the remnants of the American Pacific fleet that had not already been destroyed in the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
Fortunately for this country, the Japanese did not read the Chicago Tribune or did not believe it. In other words, the secret was out, but it was not out very far. There are degrees of secrecy, as with everything else.
New York Times has spread the secret of American financial surveillance of terrorists around the world, undermining or destroying this method of tracking them, as well as undermining the cooperation that can be expected in the future from countries fearful of political or terrorist repercussions.
Patriotism is not chic in the circles of those who assume the role of citizens of the world, whether they are discussing immigration or giving aid and comfort to the enemy in wartime.
The decline and fall of the Roman Empire was as much due to the internal disintegration of the ties that bind a society together as to the assaults of the Romans' external enemies.
The pride of being a Roman citizen was destroyed by cheapening that citizenship by giving it to too many other people. The sense of duty and loyalty eroded among both the elites and the masses.
Without such things, there could be no Roman Empire. Ultimately, without such things, there can be no United States of America. In neither case have tangible wealth and power been enough to save a country or a civilization, for the tangibles do not work without the intangibles.
Copyright © 2006 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
Yes, I am proud to be an American. One reason for me is freedom of the press. Another reason is that the President is not above the law.
Give me a green card and I'll tell you!
I think most of us know that hallmarks of a thriving democracy are deep governmental secrecy that fosters an acquiesence by the People to the slow but steady erosion of their civil rights and civil liberties in the name of fighting an amorphous war against a faceless enemy. It's all about being sheparded into an acceptance that we should be glad to have our Cons utional rights ignored because we can't be safe without government using those means to protect us. In the end, patriotism is all about allowing the government to do whatever it claims is necessary, by whatever means it chooses, to save our bacon. Safety is far more precious than freedom.
"It's all about being sheparded ..... to save our bacon"
mixed metaphor!
Try" "It's all about being sheeple herded .... to save our lambchops"
Proud to be an American? Absolutely. Ashamed to be an American at this point? Absolutely!
Shameful pride. And oxymoron, I believe.
I'm proud to be a Spurs fan, I am happy they won three les. I'm ashamed that they lost to those pussy mavs though.
Not the same.
Proud to be a Spurs Fan and being ashamed they lost (even if that's a bit silly) are not mutually exclusive sentiments.
Proud to be an American while being ashamed to be an American are mutually exclusive.
I'm proud to be an American but I am ashamed of what the GOP has done to her. Better?
I assume you are one of those folks who say you can't support the troops if you don't support the mission.
Example of how you can:
I support the Spurs but I don't like Pop. I support the players but I do not support the game plan that their leader has given them. Just because I don't like Pop does not mean I don't support the players.
I support the troops but I abhor Bush. I support our troops but I do not support our leader's game plan.
Why would you be ashamed of the actions of a group to which you don't belong?
Because that group has shamed what I love.
No. I'm one of those folks that say rabid, unreasonable, and traitorous opposition to the mission (such as intelligence leaks) is undermining the security of our troops.
But it's the game plan they have to work with and by undermining it, you're putting their security at risk.
Still doesn't explain your shame.
Whose we?
For your info, we're the longest standing Republic Democracy after the good days of Greece and Rome. And what era of "bogus safeguarding vestigal rights to our enemies and potential suspects" did this country ever participate.
Rights!
As a lawyer do you not know that during times of war rights like freedom of speech are suspended somewhat, and that the supreme court has distinguished between times of war and peace?
Give me a time when our government has not overreached its duties to protect us. You can't even point that out can you? Not even the Clinton Administration was saintly in these matters.
Oh, and if the team you support told you they support Pop and to shut the up because you're bringing down morale and undermining their chances to win games, would you?
I am ashamed the Bush eroded any credibility this country has accrued. I am ashamed to be associated with people who have sold their intellectual honesty in order to support the party in power.
I'm ashamed that the moral "pompousity" of this board has reached an all time high.
I think you're misusing the word ashamed.
But, nevertheless, you should be ashamed of your association with people who have sold their intellectual honesty in order to oppose the war in Iraq. People on the left who, before the March 2003 invasion voted for the use of force, who stated on the record that they too believed Saddam Hussein to have weapons of mass destruction, who supported the Clinton administration in its condemnation of the regime and supported the official policy of regime change in that country.
You should be even more ashamed because of your antics in light of the recent revelations that Iraq did have at least a Chemical weapons program that he was hiding as late as 1999.
So, even though your shame is misplaced, it is appropriate.
No. It is my right as a fan to hate the coach regardless of what some players say. I would like to ask the team how my comments bring down the morale considering I hate Popovich. The you would have to assume the players can't think for themselves and they need Pop in order to win games when Pop never plays one down.
You know you continually spout this crap. No one has had their civil
liberties violated. You and the ACLU or anyother organization can cite
one, just one, incident where it has occured. So give it a rest.
You are so wrong and you damn well know it.
You are full of crap. Just like your argument.
You're obviously not a team player. Why have a coach at all?
Programs that existed on paper. You should be ashamed. You should be ashemd because you allowed the President to cherry pick his reasons for war and you turn around and criticize those who choose not to accept them.Those same people also stated that they assumed Bush would use force as a last resort but instead that was his first option.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
