Big Brother is at it again

[feederband]

The way you think is one of the main reason 1000's died on 9/11...

I would lvoe to respond to this, but it would be deemed political.

Suffice it to say that there was already plenty of information available within the government's constitutional bounds to stop 9/11, but there were many breakdowns in both law enforcement and intelligence.

Yeah lets not get political ...Big brother is watching here too..

But what I'm saying I rather them be doing stuff even if I have no knowledge of it all together than to do nothing and wait until sometrhing else happens...

[kevin]

There are plenty of countries where it is allowed feederband. Ours is not one of them, and it never has been. Constitution, founding fathers, thousands of dead American soldiers, etc.

[Regit]

Freedom and safety do not go hand in hand.

Four years ago, Iraq was an extremely safe place to live. Totalitarian regimes are generally extremely safe as long as you don't cross paths with the government. If you obey the government, you'll generally live a very safe life.

I'll take freedom with a side of danger, please.

I do really hope that we never face a series of terrorist attacks. Under such a situation, the US would slide in to totalitarianism (fascism) quite easily.

[Windswept]

good points Regit

[zoeyann]

Not so long ago we had a topic similar to this, when they were banning items from airplanes due to a scare.

My opinion is that only if there is some reason to expect some specific threat to security then the government must act to protect it citizens. this is primarily a weather board so I will use this anaology. If a hurricane threatens the government must call for an evacuation of the area, but they can not force people to leave their homes for no reason.

I do not want other's reading my mail or listening in on my conversations. Even though I have nothing to hide I was taught by our own government sanctioned schools that I have a right to privacy, free speech, and a responsibility to be involved in the political process. Way to much blood has been spilled to secure and protect these freedoms, it would be a shame to give them up so easily now.

[Stephanie]

The way you think is one of the main reason 1000's died on 9/11...

I would lvoe to respond to this, but it would be deemed political.

Suffice it to say that there was already plenty of information available within the government's constitutional bounds to stop 9/11, but there were many breakdowns in both law enforcement and intelligence.

Yeah lets not get political ...Big brother is watching here too.. :lol:

But what I'm saying I rather them be doing stuff even if I have no knowledge of it all together than to do nothing and wait until sometrhing else happens...

You got that right!

Freedom and safety do not go hand in hand.

I agree with that as well.

I don't want people having "access" to anything of mine, being conversations, where I've been, my money, etc.

I kind of wonder if part of it has to do with the fact that we've regulated taking responsibility for one's actions completely out the window. It's always someone else's fault...

[Derek Ortt]

If I have to give up some of my priveledges to ensure the FREEDOM FROM attack, by all means.

The good of the USA comes before any of my concerns and I am alarmed that some are not willing to make the necessary sacrifices for the greater good.

If one is not doing anything wrong, who cares who is listening or knows. Only those who are causing trouble have anything to worry about

[kevin]

If I have to give up some of my priveledges to ensure the FREEDOM FROM attack, by all means.

The good of the USA comes before any of my concerns and I am alarmed that some are not willing to make the necessary sacrifices for the greater good.

If one is not doing anything wrong, who cares who is listening or knows. Only those who are causing trouble have anything to worry about

Most Americans are not Franconists so get used to disappointment.

[Ptarmigan]

Not so long ago we had a topic similar to this, when they were banning items from airplanes due to a scare.

My opinion is that only if there is some reason to expect some specific threat to security then the government must act to protect it citizens. this is primarily a weather board so I will use this anaology. If a hurricane threatens the government must call for an evacuation of the area, but they can not force people to leave their homes for no reason.

I do not want other's reading my mail or listening in on my conversations. Even though I have nothing to hide I was taught by our own government sanctioned schools that I have a right to privacy, free speech, and a responsibility to be involved in the political process. Way to much blood has been spilled to secure and protect these freedoms, it would be a shame to give them up so easily now.

Good analogy. I am concerned about freedom and civil liberties like the next person and side with it. On the other hand, I really hate it when people are being chicken littles or a bunch of boys who cry wolf about eroding civil liberties and freedom. They are not in any way helping and only making more people turned off by it. In some ways, I think they hurt the cause of protecting freedom.

[Yarrah]

Isn't giving up more and more of our freedoms exactly what the terrorists and other anti-western people want?

If I have to give up some of my priveledges to ensure the FREEDOM FROM attack, by all means.

How much freedom would you be willing to give up to ensure you're not attacked? If it means turning the US into a totalitarian state whith a Stasi-like secret service, would you accept that?

[Lindaloo]

This does not affect everyone. This only targets people under suspicion of domestic terrorism and terrorism period! Some of the trials of suspected terrorists yelled that their rights were being violated. This just stiffens up the governments right to open their mail and listen in on their cell phones without having to obtain a court order. If you are not a suspect, then why even worry about it.

[Lindaloo]

Isn't giving up more and more of our freedoms exactly what the terrorists and other anti-western people want?

If I have to give up some of my priveledges to ensure the FREEDOM FROM attack, by all means.

How much freedom would you be willing to give up to ensure you're not attacked? If it means turning the US into a totalitarian state whith a Stasi-like secret service, would you accept that?

YOU are not even from the United States, so why does it matter so much to you! Tell me, what freedoms do you have?

[Derek Ortt]

How much freedom would you be willing to give up to ensure you're not attacked? If it means turning the US into a totalitarian state whith a Stasi-like secret service, would you accept that?

If that's what it took to ensure the safety of myself and my fellow Americans, as well as the survival of our nation, then by all means I would accept a totalitarian government in about .5 seconds

Remember, one can have a country without "freedom", but one cannot have FREEDOM without a country

[Ptarmigan]

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

[zoeyann]

This does not affect everyone. This only targets people under suspicion of domestic terrorism and terrorism period! Some of the trials of suspected terrorists yelled that their rights were being violated. This just stiffens up the governments right to open their mail and listen in on their cell phones without having to obtain a court order. If you are not a suspect, then why even worry about it

This really does effect everyone. It starts with protection from just terrorists, but what happens when it is expanded to include anyone who questions the government. How far could the civil rights movement or those who opposed the draft have gotten if the leaders of those movements have been labeled as domestic terrorist . This does not just mean the US, but any country. The founding fathers of this country knew from experience what it was like to live without these rights, and choose there wording very carefully and put in checks and balances to insure that type of freedom for their descendents. What happens during a Katrina type event, do they get to put everyone who said anything bad about the government on a cell phone conversation on a possible terrorist watch list. Alot of terrible things were said about a lot of public officials on these types of message boards, on cell phones, and through the mail. How do they determine who is just making an off hand angry comment or is a potential bomber.

Sorry for the long post. But isn't there a difference between a reasonable about of additional security when necessary, and the dismantling of eveything this country stands for to begin with. Also sorry if anyone finds my post offensive I do not mean it to be.

[Yarrah]

YOU are not even from the United States, so why does it matter so much to you! Tell me, what freedoms do you have?

It matters so much to me, because there are similar processes, where certain freedoms are at stake, going on here.

As for my freedoms, they're the same as yours.

[Aslkahuna]

For an education and lesson on this topic, I would recommend listening closely to the dialogue and note the POLITICAL events taking place in Star Wars Episodes I-III. Especially note the dialogue between Senator Palpatine and Queen Amidala in Episode I and how he takes advantage of the ineffectiveness of the Republic and the disenchantment of it to turn a Democracy into a Dictatorship and how he cons the defenders of that Democracy into setting up their own demise (books show this even better). Lucas used the the collapse of the Weimar Republic and the rise of the Nazis as the template but more than one person has seen the parallel between our current state of affairs where our own Government is ineffectual and corrupt and treated with disdain by many citizens.

Steve

[Lindaloo]

This does not affect everyone. This only targets people under suspicion of domestic terrorism and terrorism period! Some of the trials of suspected terrorists yelled that their rights were being violated. This just stiffens up the governments right to open their mail and listen in on their cell phones without having to obtain a court order. If you are not a suspect, then why even worry about it

This really does effect everyone. It starts with protection from just terrorists, but what happens when it is expanded to include anyone who questions the government. How far could the civil rights movement or those who opposed the draft have gotten if the leaders of those movements have been labeled as domestic terrorist . This does not just mean the US, but any country. The founding fathers of this country knew from experience what it was like to live without these rights, and choose there wording very carefully and put in checks and balances to insure that type of freedom for their descendents. What happens during a Katrina type event, do they get to put everyone who said anything bad about the government on a cell phone conversation on a possible terrorist watch list. Alot of terrible things were said about a lot of public officials on these types of message boards, on cell phones, and through the mail. How do they determine who is just making an off hand angry comment or is a potential bomber.

Sorry for the long post. But isn't there a difference between a reasonable about of additional security when necessary, and the dismantling of eveything this country stands for to begin with. Also sorry if anyone finds my post offensive I do not mean it to be.

Now you are going to the extreme with your "anyone who questions the government." You can interpret it ANYWAY you want to, but the fact remains that it is what it is. I am not going to waste my time worrying about it as long as Americans are protected from those that want to kill us.

Steve, Star Wars is just a movie.

[Lindaloo]

YOU are not even from the United States, so why does it matter so much to you! Tell me, what freedoms do you have?

It matters so much to me, because there are similar processes, where certain freedoms are at stake, going on here.

As for my freedoms, they're the same as yours.

We are the United States of America. Good ole' U.S. of A.

[kevin]

Yarrah has the same freedoms Lindaloo. He belongs to the good ole Netherlands. The first capitalistic country on the face of earth. The first to have a stock exchange. They also had a republic while the United States was still nothing but three geographic groupings of English colonies.

From 1580ish till 1795 the Dutch Republic existed.

I think a response like 'What do you know of civil liberties' to a foreigner isn't doing much for our standing on the world stage. I understand patriotism, and I don't mean to assume something like this, but are you saying we're the only ones who have a reason to be patriotic and proud of our liberties?


And really, Star Wars is just a movie, and 1984/Animal Farm are just small books.