From: Spudboy100@aol.com
Date: Sat Sep 28 2002 - 01:07:36 MDT
Our checks and balances, should freedom come under dictatorial threat could
be:
1. A national tax strike. If money can't come in, then even if the IRS
makes examples of a few, many more would collapse the financial
system of the government.
2. Work-stopages. Same reason as above for affecting Gov finance.
3. Avoiding and inhibiting military service. Also police protection.
4. Voting in the opposition party
5. Inhibiting the national/international telcom infrastructure
-I could go on and on.
Needless to state, I support President Bush, though I believe the
administration to be too soft on jihadi terrorism! Also, I am uneasy with how
long people can be detained without being charged if they are US citizens.
Having said that, I hold that we are indeed, in a kulturkampf with the
Wahabbis and Shia, as well as large Sunni elements, and this war, could be
lethel to our republic. There is now the chance that a well-directed 1st
strike could temporarilly dis-unite the United States. That is where the
dilema is, in my opinion.
I like Rummy better for his intelligence and his clarity of thinking--or
thinking that I approve of.
======================================================
Robert Bradbury Noted:
<<Come on Eli. Ashcroft is operating in an open society
with some checks and balances (you will notice judges
poking holes in his agenda left and right). Hussein
on the other hand has directly caused the deaths of
hundreds of thousands of people and has no real
checks and balances within Iraq and precious few
outside Iraq.
I'd consider Rumsfeld a greater threat than Ashcroft
because he doesn't have to behave under the same set
of checks and balances that Ashcroft does.
Robert>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:19 MST