11 of 71

Write now Article Tools

Homeland Security: a need for protection or the right to intrude?

With the enacment of the much ballyhoo'ed Homeland Security Act came the two sides:
Side A - the American Patriot, that person who believes in security at all costs. This person doesn't mind giving up certain individual freedoms for the "good of the cause", the standard bearer.
Side B - the 'other' American Patriot. That person who believes in security, but doesn't believe in the extremism of "at all costs". He still wants protection, but "don't tread on me".

I guess the real question is "What are the limits?"

Side B would tend to argue the story of "1984" and "Big Brother" is watching you, while Side A scoffs at the mere suggestion.

Side A would appear to be the "boy who cried wolf" in the eyes of a Side B person.

Who is right? I'd guess it depends on your own perspective in the matter, and your own political leaning.

National ID? Fortunately some states have already balked at this, wonder which states will accept it? Do you want to live there?

Wiretapping? while this has been going on for years (it's called espionage and counter-espionage) is it really necessary to spin it in such a way as to make you suspect your neighbor is an evil mastermind bent on the overthrow of the US Government as we know it?

The list goes on, but I believe these to be the most intriguing aspects.

As for me and mine, we will go on living our lives day-to-day, and should the government feel the need to know what I do on a daily basis, 'They' know where I am and how to contact me.

Learn more about this author, TheUnexpectedBill.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Has America has gone too far with anti-terrorism??
We want to hear your view. Write now!