Why isnt this stickied? NSA caught red handed eavesdropping on, well, everyone.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Suicidal criminals will always be a threat to a free and open country, due to the very nature of the country being free and open. There is very little we as a country can do to eliminate this threat, short of genocide or becoming non-free...er. Moreso, anyway.

Other nations have always warred against other nations, and don't necessarily require genocide to defeat. At last count, China has a relatively hostile gov't and culture, and a boatload of nuclear-tipped missiles. If we could invent a decently effective system (how effective? I don't know - 25-100% would cover some bases, eh?) to defend against ICBMs, I'd be all for it. I *am* all for it, in fact - we can get the funding for the program from the DHS, TSA, and BATFE, for starters. If that won't quite fit the bill, I'm sure the IRS wouldn't mind sacrificing itself for the greater good.

To summarize: can't win against "the terrorists" - we can only not lose, by not voluntarily giving up our remaining freedoms. Can win against other, identifiable, external threats by making bigger guns, like we've been doing for at least the past 6,000+ years of recorded history.
 
Lobotomy Boy,

You need to peruse your dictionary just a bit more, friend. Just because I recognize that someone wishes to kill me does not necessarily mean I fear that person. My emotion might be one of pity for the poor misguided sinner. Even if I realize he wants to kill you, me, our families, and everyone we know, it does not follow that I fear this person one teensy, eensy little bit...much less have ignoble fear for that person.

And, yes, addressing a person as a coward for recognizing a state of mind in another (someone who did not express or even vaguely imply fear-ignoble or noble) is crowding darn close to personal attack.
 
You need to peruse your dictionary just a bit more, friend. Just because I recognize that someone wishes to kill me does not necessarily mean I fear that person.
Click to expand...

No, but pandering to irrational fear mongering to the point of abandoning the Constitution does.

And, yes, addressing a person as a coward for recognizing a state of mind in another (someone who did not express or even vaguely imply fear-ignoble or noble) is crowding darn close to personal attack.
Click to expand...

If you can't use an adjective that fits, well then the terrorists have already won.
 
Amazing thread drift.

Back to the original direction. Gotta a beef with the federales tapping into our communications infrastructure? Take it to congress since it was that particular pallette of idiots who wrote a law mid to late 90's mandating quick connect/disconnect taps on the entire communications backbone. Congress mandated the action. Clinton used the capability. Bush used it also. Once again we so-called enlightened, liberty loving Americans completely ignore the those who are responsible for the effects we find so objectionable. I am no Bush bootlicker but I am frankly getting sick and tired of giving congress a free pass in its predatory conduct.
 
Waitone:

Back to the original direction. Gotta a beef with the federales tapping into our communications infrastructure? Take it to congress since it was that particular pallette of idiots who wrote a law mid to late 90's mandating quick connect/disconnect taps on the entire communications backbone. Congress mandated the action. Clinton used the capability. Bush used it also. Once again we so-called enlightened, liberty loving Americans completely ignore the those who are responsible for the effects we find so objectionable. I am no Bush bootlicker but I am frankly getting sick and tired of giving congress a free pass in its predatory conduct.
Click to expand...

I've noticed few congress and especially the senate are listening anymore. The only ones listening are on the far left wing and listening only to the moonbats
 
Lobotomy Boy said:
If you can't use an adjective that fits, well then the terrorists have already won.
Click to expand...
LB, you never were in danger of winning that little side-debate, but the above pretty much gives it all away. It is a parody of itself.
 
LB, you never were in danger of winning that little side-debate, but the above pretty much gives it all away. It is a parody of itself.
Click to expand...

Why yes, it is a parody of itself. I'm glad you pointed that out for the irony challenged among us. Thanks.
 
The Supreme Court ruled in 1979 that phone numbers are protected. By that standard, there was invasion of privacy. They have no clue who dialed that number.
 
Anybody got any idea what kind of computers were used to run the Echelon program in the late 40s? :)
 
Well, this thread has taken off.

After reading some of these posts and listening to people calling into talk radio shows....

I have to change my answer as to whom I fear most...


I fear all of these boneheads out there who think this type of thing is okay.
I fear the mentality of "If you have nothing to hide, whats the big deal"
I fear Tyranny and Opression in the name of Peace and Security.
I fear for what this country will be like when my baby girl grows up.

I do not fear 'terrorists'... I dont mean that in the sense that I'm tough and I will stand tall and live my life as usual and all that %&#$ I hear on tv, etc.
I say that I do not fear them, because I do not view these people as a threat to my personal security. I will never die at the hands of a 3rd world terrorist.

I fear a place where my views and beliefs or words can be a crime.
I fear that all of these things may happen here.
I fear that the hoards of mindless sheep will accept this as normal and okay.

Though we may not see it happen fully in our lifetimes... the next generation is being groomed into it from day one. First in the school system where you must submit to searches of your property/person/locker. You are not allowed to do certain things, or express certain views.
Ever gone out to a club for a drink or some dancing.... you have to show your ID to about 6 people get searched twice, sometimes you even get your ID scanned and your photo taken.

Hello paranoid police state, goodbye freedom and civil liberties.
 
Is it right...no. Has it been happening for a long time...yes. Does that make it right...no. Will it continue no matter what we do...yes. Will our rights for freedom of speech be gone some day...yes. They're half gone now yet most of us don't realize it. Don't believe me... well we have become a society of these words are "offensive". Remember when we were kids "sticks and stones can break my bones but names will never harm me" Well we have been slowly taught that certain words are a no no. We can even be sued for using them.
Our next generation is being groomed in school so we as parents cannot prevent it.
Will most of us go down kicking and screaming...yes. Will it change anyhting...no.
Remember George Orwells book "1984"? He was just ahead of his time.
I know it's not like that yet but lets see about the year 2084?;)
 
Is it right...no. Has it been happening for a long time...yes. Does that make it right...no. Will it continue no matter what we do...yes.
Click to expand...

I've accepted this for decades, and have not trusted my government since the 1970s. All our leaders have behaved like this. The frightening thing about the current administration is that they are claiming they are above the law rather than breaking the law clandestinely. This, to me, is the equivalent of Caesar crossing the Rubicon, and this cannot be tolerated if the Republic is to stand.

I just gotta ask a simple minded question. To those who adhere to the libertarian philosophy (small L), is it ever legitimate for the state to defend itself?
Click to expand...

Yes. And your point is...? You wouldn't be trying to distract us from an argument you cannot win, would you?
 
I just gotta ask a simple minded question. To those who adhere to the libertarian philosophy (small L), is it ever legitimate for the state to defend itself?
Click to expand...
Well, of course :rolleyes: - it is legitimate for an individual, a community, or a nation to defend him/her/itself.

But just who is the "state" trying to protect "itself" from in this case ... a handful of foreign radical terrorists, or the very people whom the state is supposed to serve:confused:

For example, consider this analysis: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/rudmin1.html
 
Excellent article, Tallpine. For this mathamatical impossibility the frightened (I hear it is politically incorrect to call them "cowardly") among us are willing to relinquish what remains of our liberty. Nevermind that by relinquishing liberty they only give the government tools to use for fear mongering and political espionage rather than furthering the cause of safety, as that article argues so well.

If anyone wants more evidence of the ways in which this administration abuses the information it gathers for political gain, look at what the Justice Department did to Dennis Hastert, when it leaked incriminating information to ABC News. If you're wondering why Bush is backpeddling on using the information gathered when the FBI raided Jefferson's office, the answer is that even he knows he crossed a line with the Hastert leak and he's starting to get worried. Who knows--maybe we won't have to wait for a Democratic congress for an impeachment hearing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top