Fine Line Between Safety and Rights of the Individual
Reader comment on item: Why the Japanese Internment Still Matters

Submitted by Marc Thompson (United States), Jan 5, 2005 at 20:59

I remember 9/11. I remember where I was when I saw the second plane hit the towers, and how the country shut down for the remainder of the week. I felt anger, but my training doesn't permit me to indulge in panic. I listened as individuals publicly expressed anger and shock, love, loss and eventually hatred. The one interview I remember from the hundreds telecast was from a man in his 20's or 30's beseeching the government to protect him and his family "at any cost!"

This is the welcome mat for the extremists, the radicals on the conservative end of the spectrum of our government, to delay, suspend and otherwise terminate some of the rights of the individual in favor of National Security. Herein is the real danger! ...

Mr. Pipes, how can you say we haven't already established an Internment Camp in Puerto Rico at Guantanamo?
The Supreme Court has the sometimes unpopular task of sorting out those laws which work within the framework of our Constitution from those that violate the basic tenets of the Constitution.

Laws are made when people panic and are ready to indulge their fears "at any Cost!"

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.