Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by poncho, Dec 17, 2010.
IN the name of security, our freedoms are stripped away. The saddest part is that Joe Q. Citizen is standing still for it.
Well now you got another trillion you can hoist on the backs of our kids & grandkids......Well Done Washington, Well Done!
I haven't lost any freedoms guaranteed to me by the Constitution. Not even one.
Rockwell is continuing his own special brand of fear mongering. He has become what he thinks he is warning us against.
A fear monger.
Excellent, poncho! Thanks for posting this. :thumbs:
>I haven't lost any freedoms guaranteed to me by the Constitution. Not even one.
EXACTLY! This is the genius of the Constitution. The anti-federalists argued that in the long run, the listed rights would become our only civil rights and that is what happened.
The Constitution was designed by the rich people for the rich people and everything is going according to plan.
Compare the American Revolution and the Russian Revolution. Same thing happened in both. The Stalinists took control of the Russian Revolution same as the rich people in the US replaced the Articles of Confederation with the Constitution.
Have you flown on a commercial airline recently? Have you been searched yet?
If you have a medical condition that requires liquid medication, have you tried to take it with you on your flight?
Do you carry a weapon on you? Do you go everywhere with it?
How about street evangelism? Have you tried that yet?
We have lost a lot of rights, including the right to privacy. It can be embarrassing for us if we knew how many of us had an itch to scratch and knew that we were caught on camera. My wife use to monitor security tapes - interesting things can be watched on them.
Now, if none of this matters to you; then you may claim that you have not lost any of the rights you have under the Constitution. I'll bet good ol' Uncle Sam hopes that nobody thinks about these things. Too many changes at once would alarm the herd.
I don't recall hearing that the Stalinists required the ratification of the local governments before imposing their agenda.
Yes, it is a nuisance. But I am not sure this is a loss of freedom.
In 1969 there were 40 hijack attempts on US airlines, and 33 of them were successfully carried out. Due to increased screening for weapons (X-ray of carry-on baggage, the use of magnetometers) the number of successful hijackings was down to 10 by 1972.
When Libyan terrorists placed a bomb in unaccompanied luggage in 1988 and brought down Pan Am flight 103, the FAA began requiring that only luggage accompanied by a passenger aboard the same flight would be loaded. These were needed changes but they wouldn't stop a suicide hijacker as we saw in 2001. That is why we have even more intrusive screening, and of course nobody likes it. You say you have lost freedom, but might be howling if none of these changes had been put into place and hijackings had continued as they had in the 60's & 70's. Maybe you just have a better plan.
There are concealed carry laws now that we didn't have in the 60's & 70's. That sounds like more freedom to me.
Street evangelism is outlawed now? It is news to me. It seems to be thriving in many areas.
Surveillance cameras catch people scratching? Heavens!
TWIC “is a biometric credential that ensures only vetted workers are eligible to enter a secure construction site, unescorted,” Ironworkers Local 361 in Ozone Park, New York, explains. “Before issuing a TWIC, TSA must conduct a security threat assessment on the TWIC applicant. An applicant who, as a result of the assessment, is determined to not pose a security threat, will be issued a TWIC card.”
In other words, construction workers in New York will need permission from the TSA and DHS in order to practice their profession and earn a living. It was much the same in the former Soviet Union and authoritarian states such as China where the government determines all aspects of an individual’s life and where even the mildly rebellious are severely punished.
Yep. I hope the American people wake up before it is too late, if it isn't already.
You do realize, right, that you did not rebut anything I said. You agree with the procedures TSA uses because you feel safer.
You don't care much about our second amendment rights being limited because we got a little bit of those rights back - and it was done by the individual staes, not the by the federal government. However, we still do not have the second amendment rights reinstated in total - we still have lost part of those rights.
If you try street evangelism in the "wrong areas," you see how they are limited.
Why should we have suveillance cameras at all? Why should we have people at WalMart deciding whether or not I look suspicious? You are OK with that, I guess, but hopefully you understand that not everyone is willing to be the classroom snitch, nor do we appreciate those who are.
If you are surrendering your rights to feel safe, then I guess you can claim that none of those rights have been taken from you.
Well it is a fact of life that certain measures have to be taken to ensure at least reasonable safety for airline passengers, or drivers sharing the road with drunks or unsafe drivers, or what have you. We can argue about where to set limits and never will all people be pleased. If you are threatened by the possibility of a patdown upon flying, or maybe being seen scratching on a surveillance video somewhere, then you are in for a real rough time. Maybe you should move to the Yukon where you can do whatever you want.
Well, I guess you are thankful for your safety at the price you are willing to pay.
I am not. Rediculing my points does not serve well for the conversion. I think you know what my point is, but it is much easier just to make fun of me.
"The right to be let alone is the underlying principle of the Constitution's Bill of Rights."
-- Erwin Griswold - (Dean, Harvard Law School - 1960)
You sure do whine a lot about imagined slights.
No I haven't lost any "rights" guaranteed by the Constitution. Not even one.
There is no right to "privacy" enumerated in the Constitution. You have no right guaranteeing you won't be subject to reasonable searches.
You have no guaranteed right to carry firearms in the constitution.
You have an active imagination. Why is it you want everyone to be as fearful as you are?
You are truly amazing Carpro. You will go against your own beliefs just to argue and be a grouch. :BangHead:
As long as the government doesn't pass a law against grouching and complaining you will be alright! :laugh:
According to one report, undercover TSA agents testing security at a Newark airport terminal on one day in 2006 found that TSA screeners failed to detect concealed bombs and guns 20 out of 22 times. A 2007 government audit leaked to USA Today revealed that undercover agents were successful slipping simulated explosives and bomb parts through Los Angeles's LAX airport in 50 out of 70 attempts, and at Chicago's O'Hare airport agents made 75 attempts and succeeded in getting through undetected 45 times. SOURCE
An examination of 101 popular smartphone "apps"—games and other software applications for iPhone and Android phones—showed that 56 transmitted the phone's unique device ID to other companies without users' awareness or consent. Forty-seven apps transmitted the phone's location in some way. Five sent age, gender and other personal details to outsiders.
The findings reveal the intrusive effort by online-tracking companies to gather personal data about people in order to flesh out detailed dossiers on them. SOURCE
Area law enforcement have announced the launch of a new program, where Waste Management will help to prevent crime. Their drivers in Albany and Rensselaer Counties are now trained to observe and report to local law enforcement and first responders.
Albany Police Chief Steven Krokoff says, "The more eyes and ears we have out there the safer we make our public." SOURCE
Which of the following is an example of low-level terrorism activity?
Select the correct answer and then click Check Your Answer.
Attacking the Pentagon
Hate crimes against racial groups
The correct answer is protests. SOURCE
So here we have a massive assault led by Federal Government law enforcement agencies on left-wing dissidents and protesters who have committed no acts of violence or illegality whatsoever, preceded by months-long espionage efforts to track what they do. And as extraordinary as that conduct is, more extraordinary is the fact that they have received virtually no attention from the national media and little outcry from anyone. And it's not difficult to see why. As the recent "overhaul" of the 30-year-old FISA law illustrated -- preceded by the endless expansion of surveillance state powers, justified first by the War on Drugs and then the War on Terror -- we've essentially decided that we want our Government to spy on us without limits. There is literally no police power that the state can exercise that will cause much protest from the political and media class and, therefore, from the citizenry.
“The implications to the citizens of the U.S. are ominous. It seems that there is a hostile political agenda coming from Washington that characterizes the supporters of our constitutional freedoms as threats to our domestic security, which is totally absurd. The redirection, the refocusing of domestic threats from al Qaeda cells to ‘flag waving right-wingers’ is something that has gone from a murmur a few years ago to a roar today.”
Training government-issued cameras on ordinary citizens, many of whom brought their children to an estimated 600 Tax Day TEA Parties is a page torn out of George Orwell’s 1984 and makes the term “God Bless America” more meaningful than ever. SOURCE
Back to the days of COINTELPRO.
Previously, the Bush Administration has argued that the U.S. possesses "sovereign immunity" from suit for conducting electronic surveillance that violates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). However, FISA is only one of several laws that restrict the government's ability to wiretap. The Obama Administration goes two steps further than Bush did, and claims that the US PATRIOT Act also renders the U.S. immune from suit under the two remaining key federal surveillance laws: the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications Act. Essentially, the Obama Adminstration has claimed that the government cannot be held accountable for illegal surveillance under any federal statutes. SOURCE
And the list goes on and on and on and on . . .
It's begining to look alot like tyranny.
I don't know about you all, but I don't have any activities which need to be hidden from the government or the public. Censored for because of social convention but not denied.