To save America, we need another 9/11
POSTED BY: CrevanReaver
UPDATED: Thursday, May 23, 2024 06:04
VIEWED: 15024
PAGE 8 of 16
I think you're right about a lot of the people J.... it's just the unscrupulous people and their weapons of mass destruction and how they target our ability to continue being human to each other. I'm afraid of losing that... I think there really is a lot of good in humanity, but it won't ever be showcased if we're all forced to obey our masters through fear of the bad in humanity.
Like I said before... I don't belive in the Lord of the Flies.... if those boys had good women pointing thier heads in the right direction there woudn't have been chaos. That book was practically OZ without the gay sex. The lack of Government wasn't to blame in the least for Piggy's untimely demise.
"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
I think you're right about a lot of the people J.... it's just the unscrupulous people and their weapons of mass destruction and how they target our ability to continue being human to each other. I'm afraid of losing that... I think there really is a lot of good in humanity, but it won't ever be showcased if we're all forced to obey our masters through fear of the bad in humanity.
Like I said before... I don't belive in the Lord of the Flies.... if those boys had good women pointing thier heads in the right direction there woudn't have been chaos. That book was practically OZ without the gay sex. The lack of Government wasn't to blame in the least for Piggy's untimely demise.
Look, the hard truth here is that Good Men really would rather not have to confront Evil Men. Confrontations, threats, blockades, sanctions, wars, etc. are regrettable acts that no one wants. I was a pretty happy camper on Sept. 10, 2001...good job, proud family, a few bucks in the bank. I'm still basically the same; and although I (like most) are mesmorized by the endless brutality of the terrorists, I don't worry about it in my daily life, or really what is done to fight and defeat them. I trust that our Government, Dems & Reps...Libs & Cons alike, will do what they can to protect us. I don't care about the fine print, so to speak, of how they do it....I'm not out there wearing a badge and putting my life on the line every day, so I leave it to the professionals to safeguard America. God forbid if there ever is a serious attack, and armies of Jihadists are combing through the streets of Weston, Florida looking for infidels to shoot...I will be ready to defend my family with my snub-nose 38, my Remington 12 gauge, and as a last resort, some week-old dried out potato latkes.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You lost me until the end there J....
When that time comes, if it ever does, I will consider you a brother in arms and we will fight to the death to protect us and ours.
Don't ever give up that right to bear arms, ya hear? "A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yes. We did. There are two ways of looking at "privacy": one way views privacy as a thing onto itself, the other is the "no harm no foul" interpretation. So if someone were to execute a "sneak and peak" search of your home and (a) nothing ever came of it and (b) you didn't ever learn about it, the FIRST interpretation would say that your privacy had been violated while the second interpretation would say that it had not. Until quire recently, the government treated privacy (in theory at least) as a thing unto itself and that would be MY interpretation as well.
i'd question whether or not you ever really had that 'freedom' in the first place,
Quote:Well I've been making an issue of it for quite a while, and so have a number of other people. Just because you weren't aware of both the issue AND the response doesn't mean that it didn't happen.
. just as I'd challenge your broad brush approach that you, as any random Joe citizen, will or could have your phone " wire tapped ". As I understand it, no such activiity is taking place, what so ever. Certain requirements must first be met ( the person you're chatting with being a suspected terrorist as one ). The fact is, the Fed has had the ability to listen into ANY conversation, w/ out use of a physical wire tap. Google 'Carnivore' and 'communication' . You'll see this sort of stuff dates back to the Clinton era. But only after we've been attacked on our own soil and a Republican is in the White House do folks want to stand up and make an issue of it. I find that a bit odd.
And here's the thing Auraptor: If the government is meeting all of those requirements, then why in hell didn't they just GET a FISA directive? (Same as a warrant, different name) Heck, they can even get one 72-hours after the fact! The ONLY reason to do what they did is to create a precedent that says I'm the President and I can do whatever I want, Courts be damned. The whole conundrum about security OR civil right is a very very very very false dichotomy, only you're either too stupid to see that or too willing to bend over and see other people bent over.
Like I said: People will willingly shackle themselves for the right to get fucked over. Or in your case, to fuck over someone else. How sad is that?
---------------------------------
You're a sad little king of a sad little hill.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sig,
We actually had gotten down to a fairly civil tone; and I'd've been proud to call your append above mine up until the word 'dichotomy'; the rest is inflammatory and, IMHO, not helpful to a civil debate.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
We already had one 9/11, and look where we are. I'd think the Left wing would be cheering for the terrorist next time.
People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
Ah.. what? I think your mind may have wandered and never came back. The last thing the Left wants is anything that gives the right a chance to do this anymore.
Reporter - "Well what do you think about the state of our education system?"
Republican - "I admit it isn't exactly what we want it to be, but you can't forget about 9/11!"
Reporter - "Okay. Would you concede that our infrastructure is in rapid decline at the same time we spend billions on Iraq's?"
Republican - "Well, if that's true....Can you imagine the shape we would be in if we allowed the terrorists to blow it all up?"
Reporter - "Why do I get a feeling you aren't being entirely candid with me, sir?"
Republican - "I would have to say you are under some kind of mind-control manipulation that that the terrorists are trying to use on the American populous from some sort of new WMD or the 9/11 Muslim-witch potion."
Reporter - "What?"
*Fox reporter steps in*
Fox reporter - "Let me see if I can help clarify what Republican is saying...there have been reports coming from our intelligence that a memo, that is reported as being confirmed to have been written by Osama, has surfaced in a cave in Dubrakastan. This report mentions a possible terror plot to release 9/11 Muslim-witch potion on the masses. It states further that it will probably be released within days...I think that is why the Homeland security department took a preemptive step and raised the terror threat to Black."
Reporter - "Black?"
Fox reporter - "Yep. Don't be alarmed. This only means you can't leave your house this week."
Republican - "That is correct. See, we can never let our guard down against these barbaric terrorists. We never want to see another 9/11."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Unfortunately, when I read Auraptor's posts I go from "simmer" to "boil" in about 0.10 seconds.
Sig,We actually had gotten down to a fairly civil tone; and I'd've been proud to call your append above mine up until the word 'dichotomy'; the rest is inflammatory and, IMHO, not helpful to a civil debate.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
They were content to take the form back unsigned. I saw the doctor that day, and they never raised the point again.
So then, you admit that this was voluntary, and that there wasn't any real imposition by the Fed Gov't into your life or freedoms, right ? I have been asked my phone number and/ or address at certain stores. I politely decline. Just because they ask doesn't mean you have to answer. Well, unless it's the IRS.
Look, we're gonna actually agree on the power of the Federal Gov't being too strong in certain places, but there also has to be a pragmatic view on such matters concerning terrorism. You're aware of the GORELICK wall of seperation between different branches of Gov't. Granted, this didn't involve infringing on the rights of citizens by the Fed Gov't, but we do tend to paint ourselves in a box when it comes to trying to prevent major terrorist activity. It's not always so simple to decipher, I'll agree.
People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Sig wrote: And here's the thing Auraptor: If the government is meeting all of those requirements, then why in hell didn't they just GET a FISA directive? (Same as a warrant, different name) Heck, they can even get one 72-hours after the fact! The ONLY reason to do what they did is to create a precedent that says I'm the President and I can do whatever I want, Courts be damned. The whole conundrum about security OR civil right is a very very very very false dichotomy, only you're either too stupid to see that or too willing to bend over and see other people bent over.
Unlike you, Sig, I'm willing to take a pragmatic view on the issue. Why the hell didn't they just GET a FISA directive ? Maybe because they were afraid of leaks, as seems to be case. Seems some would rather sabotage the President's office than see us track down the terrorists. Or it could be because Foreign Intelligence Suveillance Act is too slow by today's standards to be of any real benefit. But since you've likely already talked about all this, you've casually dismissed it , out of hand, as nothing more than neocon 'talking points', and have some colorful, perjorative remark to make about anyone who disagrees with your position.
Of course, if you don't like the answer, why even ask the question? Sorry, but I'll side w/ the President and the 'need to know ' crowd on this one.
People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:No, I don't admit it was voluntary. The form -stated- that the feds could do this. The form was a bit 'odd' in that 'by signing below' I was agreeing that they 'could', which is why I didn't sign it. When I say 'could' they were not asking me permission; they were simply making the observation then wanting me to agree. The receptionist didn't seem to have a clue on the matter, so needless to say, it's not like we had a meaningful discussion. Another point, I also had an eye doctor appointment the same week. Same form, going out to everyone that day. Again, no meaningful discussion, I declined to sign the form again. If I recall the 'point' of the form was that I wouldn't sue them if they complied to the federal requirements, so what I was really declining was to not sue them if they did comply. I should caution this was about a year ago, I didn't keep a copy of the form, and this is from memory. The form stated the the federal prerogatives as a 'fact.' No, I did not go home to and check to make sure they were not simply full of hookum.
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
They were content to take the form back unsigned. I saw the doctor that day, and they never raised the point again.
So then, you admit that this was voluntary, and that there wasn't any real imposition by the Fed Gov't into your life or freedoms, right ? I have been asked my phone number and/ or address at certain stores. I politely decline. Just because they ask doesn't mean you have to answer. Well, unless it's the IRS.
Look, we're gonna actually agree on the power of the Federal Gov't being too strong in certain places, but there also has to be a pragmatic view on such matters concerning terrorism. You're aware of the GORELICK wall of seperation between different branches of Gov't. Granted, this didn't involve infringing on the rights of citizens by the Fed Gov't, but we do tend to paint ourselves in a box when it comes to trying to prevent major terrorist activity. It's not always so simple to decipher, I'll agree.
As far as the 'walls' in internal gov. red tape, I have a tendency to agree if the data is legally obtained, and various controls/privacy concerns are addressed, the agencies should be able to do needed cross references. Yes, we can paint ourselves into a corner; it needs to be avoided.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME