You can’t have it both ways, either you are protected, but loose some civil liberties, or you loose not civil liberties and more innocent people die.
I think that’s a false dichotomy. You can address failures from intelligence agencies without giving away all the citizens’ rights.
You do not defend freedom and liberty by having less and less of it.
That sounds like a good talking point, but protecting freedom while protecting the people from terrorist (who are more free in the US to commit acts of terrorist) is not easy to balance.
When you have freedom, the terrorist do as well. So the fact is that they are more free, in a free society, to commit terrorist acts. So it really it is not false dichotomy. It is one of degree, but there is a definite relationship and increase risk the more free a society is.
But freedom always comes as a price. We are free to keep and bear arms, which means we will have more accidental shootings and intentional murder. So the cost of the 4th US amendment is lost lives. So the relationship holds up here as well. The more free we are to have and use guns the more the potential cost of death by guns.
I personally feel that the freedom is worth the cost, but many don’t see it that way.
I agree with that. However, the minute something happens people will start to whine that more should have been done. These are the same people who didn’t want more done because they thought it was a loss of freedom.
So I’m ok with maintaining all our freedoms and whatever happens, happens. I just don’t want to here any whining afterwards.