- Joined
- Sep 22, 2003
- Messages
- 13,182
I think I'm on the page now
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Since when has a little thing like the constitution stopped them...
- Thread starter Cabbit
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2003
- Messages
- 20,206
A computer records the contents and screens the communication for key words, If the communication is selected due to presence of certain words, the contents are then reviewed by a human being. It is certainly wiretapping. The contents are recorded and "searched." It is not a physical search in the sense that language is used in the Executive Order.
For generations, courts did not regard wire-tapping as a "search of a person or premises." No person was touched. No premises was enterred. Pretty logical. Then wire-tapping was a "search." The Supremes had to make this "leap" in order to bring wire-tapping within the 4th Amendment in the 1960's -- within their control. Sophistry in "interpretation" or "construction" of perfectly clear language is part of what courts do. That is how a prohibition of establishing an official, state religion gets tortured into "freedom from religion" - goal-oriented construction of perfectly clear language.
Mind, reasonable people can disagree on the goal. The torture of language is just a smarmy way to reach the goal.
The federal statutes (such as the Electronic Communication Privacy Act), recognize the distinctions. English is used in its normal sense. Wire-Tapping is "aural aquisition" - someone hears it. That is distinguished from a physical search of a person or premises or an electronic search that locates the origin of a communciation ("trace").
The extent of the Executive's power to conduct warrentless "searches" has yet to be settled. Executives will claim "exigent circumstances" excuse following formalities and will even ignore direct court orders. Washington, Jackson, Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Clinton, Bush - the list is long. One might worry about where the slide stops when we go down the slope - of executive or judicial power.
For example, following the Oklahoma City bombing, the feds demanded - and got - massive volumes of records of telehone calls without warrents or court orders -- or even subpoenas (much easier to get), citing the need to capture terrorists before they could excape. That was just a tad pre-Bush. Some telephone companies held out for court orders.
For generations, courts did not regard wire-tapping as a "search of a person or premises." No person was touched. No premises was enterred. Pretty logical. Then wire-tapping was a "search." The Supremes had to make this "leap" in order to bring wire-tapping within the 4th Amendment in the 1960's -- within their control. Sophistry in "interpretation" or "construction" of perfectly clear language is part of what courts do. That is how a prohibition of establishing an official, state religion gets tortured into "freedom from religion" - goal-oriented construction of perfectly clear language.
Mind, reasonable people can disagree on the goal. The torture of language is just a smarmy way to reach the goal.
The federal statutes (such as the Electronic Communication Privacy Act), recognize the distinctions. English is used in its normal sense. Wire-Tapping is "aural aquisition" - someone hears it. That is distinguished from a physical search of a person or premises or an electronic search that locates the origin of a communciation ("trace").
The extent of the Executive's power to conduct warrentless "searches" has yet to be settled. Executives will claim "exigent circumstances" excuse following formalities and will even ignore direct court orders. Washington, Jackson, Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Clinton, Bush - the list is long. One might worry about where the slide stops when we go down the slope - of executive or judicial power.
For example, following the Oklahoma City bombing, the feds demanded - and got - massive volumes of records of telehone calls without warrents or court orders -- or even subpoenas (much easier to get), citing the need to capture terrorists before they could excape. That was just a tad pre-Bush. Some telephone companies held out for court orders.
- Joined
- May 4, 2001
- Messages
- 1,553
Cabbit, I swear this is the truth, when I first read the title I thought it read "Since when has a little thing like constipation stopped them?". That's why I didn't read your post for some time:foot:
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2003
- Messages
- 13,182
I feel safer already
U.S. accused of spying on those who disagree with Bush policiesBY WILLIAM E. GIBSONSouth Florida Sun-Sentinel
WASHINGTON - While the White House defended domestic surveillance as a safeguard against terrorism, a Florida peace activist and several Democrats in Congress accused the Bush administration on Friday of spying on Americans who disagree with President Bush's policies.
Richard Hersh, of Boca Raton, Fla., director of Truth Project Inc. of Palm Beach County, told an ad hoc panel of House Democrats that his group and others in South Florida have been infiltrated and spied upon despite having no connections to terrorists.
"Agents rummaged through the trash, snooped into e-mails, packed Web sites and listened in on phone conversations," Hersh charged. "We know that address books and activist meeting lists have disappeared."
The Truth Project gained national attention when NBC News reported last month that it was described as a "credible threat" in a database of suspicious activity compiled by the Pentagon's Talon program. The listing cited the group's gathering a year ago at a Quaker meeting house in Lake Worth, Fla., to talk about ways to counter military recruitment at high schools.
Talon is separate from the controversial domestic-surveillance program conducted by the National Security Agency. Bush has acknowledged signing orders that allow the NSA to eavesdrop without the usual court warrants, prompting an outcry from many in Congress.
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/politics/13675006.htm
Northeast Ohio Peace Group Condemns Pentagon Spying on Akron Area Citizens
by AFSC Tuesday, Dec. 20, 2005 at 12:12 AM
afscole@aol.com 330-253-7151
Statement of Dana Williams and Greg Coleridge of the Northeast Ohio AFSC
The Northeast Ohio American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), a Quaker peace, justice and humanitarian organization, condemns the action of the Department of Defense (DOD) for their spying on Akron area citizens who took part in a peaceful and lawful march and rally in Akron on March 19, 2005 to commemorate the second anniversary of the start of the Iraq war. We are outraged that the Pentagon would spy on citizens who were doing nothing more than expressing their First Amendment freedom of speech and freedom of assembly rights against the war and occupation of Iraq.
More than 200 Akron area citizens gathered at Perkins Park on March 19. We marched to a military recruitment center where a Mennonite and person connected to the Akron Catholic Worker community spoke. We then marched to the local office of the FBI where an immigration attorney spoke. We then proceeded to the Federal Building for a rally, where several people offered remarks, including two people with AFSC. At the end, we read the names of more than 1500 killed US troops in Iraq and more than a 1000 Iraqis killed. We then deposited those names in two cardboard coffins, which a few days later we delivered to the offices of US Senators Mike DeWine and George Voinovich. We also spilled water with a little red food coloring from a 55-gallon drum on the sidewalk to symbolize the blood being spilled on all sides in Iraq and that the war in Iraq was waged for oil and greed.
For these actions, our own government spied on us. We publicized our event widely beforehand as a peaceful march and rally. That day, we didn't block traffic. We didn't destroy property. We didn't threaten anyone in our speeches. Yet, we were photographed and monitored by our own government.
http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2005/12/18301.php
U.S. 'No-Fly' List Curtails Liberties
Intended as a counterterrorism tool, it doesn't work and tramples on travelers' rights
By Bruce Schneier
Newsday
August 25, 2004
Imagine a list of suspected terrorists so dangerous that we can't ever let them fly, yet so innocent that we can't arrest them - even under the draconian provisions of the Patriot Act.
This is the federal government's "no-fly" list. First circulated in the weeks after 9/11 as a counterterrorism tool, its details are shrouded in secrecy.
But, because the list is filled with inaccuracies and ambiguities, thousands of innocent, law-abiding Americans have been subjected to lengthy interrogations and invasive searches every time they fly, and sometimes forbidden to board airplanes.
It also has been a complete failure, and has not been responsible for a single terrorist arrest anywhere.
Instead, the list has snared Asif Iqbal, a Rochester businessman who shares a name with a suspected terrorist currently in custody in Guantanamo.
It's snared a 71-year-old retired English teacher. A man with a top-secret government clearance. A woman whose name is similar to that of an Australian man 20 years younger. Anyone with the name David Nelson is on the list. And recently it snared Sen. Ted Kennedy, who had the unfortunate luck to share a name with "T Kennedy," an alias once used by a person someone decided should be on the list.
There is no recourse for those on the list, and their stories quickly take on a Kafkaesque tone. People can be put on the list for any reason; no standards exist. There's no ability to review any evidence against you, or even confirm that you are actually on the list.
And, for most people, there's no way to get off the list or to "prove" once and for all that they're not whoever the list is really looking for. It took Kennedy three weeks to get his name off the list. People without his political pull have spent years futilely trying to clear their names.
There's something distinctly un-American about a secret government blacklist, with no right of appeal or judicial review. Even worse, there's evidence that it's being used as a political harassment tool: environmental activists, peace protesters, and anti-free-trade activists have all found themselves on the list.
U.S. accused of spying on those who disagree with Bush policiesBY WILLIAM E. GIBSONSouth Florida Sun-Sentinel
WASHINGTON - While the White House defended domestic surveillance as a safeguard against terrorism, a Florida peace activist and several Democrats in Congress accused the Bush administration on Friday of spying on Americans who disagree with President Bush's policies.
Richard Hersh, of Boca Raton, Fla., director of Truth Project Inc. of Palm Beach County, told an ad hoc panel of House Democrats that his group and others in South Florida have been infiltrated and spied upon despite having no connections to terrorists.
"Agents rummaged through the trash, snooped into e-mails, packed Web sites and listened in on phone conversations," Hersh charged. "We know that address books and activist meeting lists have disappeared."
The Truth Project gained national attention when NBC News reported last month that it was described as a "credible threat" in a database of suspicious activity compiled by the Pentagon's Talon program. The listing cited the group's gathering a year ago at a Quaker meeting house in Lake Worth, Fla., to talk about ways to counter military recruitment at high schools.
Talon is separate from the controversial domestic-surveillance program conducted by the National Security Agency. Bush has acknowledged signing orders that allow the NSA to eavesdrop without the usual court warrants, prompting an outcry from many in Congress.
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/politics/13675006.htm
Northeast Ohio Peace Group Condemns Pentagon Spying on Akron Area Citizens
by AFSC Tuesday, Dec. 20, 2005 at 12:12 AM
afscole@aol.com 330-253-7151
Statement of Dana Williams and Greg Coleridge of the Northeast Ohio AFSC
The Northeast Ohio American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), a Quaker peace, justice and humanitarian organization, condemns the action of the Department of Defense (DOD) for their spying on Akron area citizens who took part in a peaceful and lawful march and rally in Akron on March 19, 2005 to commemorate the second anniversary of the start of the Iraq war. We are outraged that the Pentagon would spy on citizens who were doing nothing more than expressing their First Amendment freedom of speech and freedom of assembly rights against the war and occupation of Iraq.
More than 200 Akron area citizens gathered at Perkins Park on March 19. We marched to a military recruitment center where a Mennonite and person connected to the Akron Catholic Worker community spoke. We then marched to the local office of the FBI where an immigration attorney spoke. We then proceeded to the Federal Building for a rally, where several people offered remarks, including two people with AFSC. At the end, we read the names of more than 1500 killed US troops in Iraq and more than a 1000 Iraqis killed. We then deposited those names in two cardboard coffins, which a few days later we delivered to the offices of US Senators Mike DeWine and George Voinovich. We also spilled water with a little red food coloring from a 55-gallon drum on the sidewalk to symbolize the blood being spilled on all sides in Iraq and that the war in Iraq was waged for oil and greed.
For these actions, our own government spied on us. We publicized our event widely beforehand as a peaceful march and rally. That day, we didn't block traffic. We didn't destroy property. We didn't threaten anyone in our speeches. Yet, we were photographed and monitored by our own government.
http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2005/12/18301.php
U.S. 'No-Fly' List Curtails Liberties
Intended as a counterterrorism tool, it doesn't work and tramples on travelers' rights
By Bruce Schneier
Newsday
August 25, 2004
Imagine a list of suspected terrorists so dangerous that we can't ever let them fly, yet so innocent that we can't arrest them - even under the draconian provisions of the Patriot Act.
This is the federal government's "no-fly" list. First circulated in the weeks after 9/11 as a counterterrorism tool, its details are shrouded in secrecy.
But, because the list is filled with inaccuracies and ambiguities, thousands of innocent, law-abiding Americans have been subjected to lengthy interrogations and invasive searches every time they fly, and sometimes forbidden to board airplanes.
It also has been a complete failure, and has not been responsible for a single terrorist arrest anywhere.
Instead, the list has snared Asif Iqbal, a Rochester businessman who shares a name with a suspected terrorist currently in custody in Guantanamo.
It's snared a 71-year-old retired English teacher. A man with a top-secret government clearance. A woman whose name is similar to that of an Australian man 20 years younger. Anyone with the name David Nelson is on the list. And recently it snared Sen. Ted Kennedy, who had the unfortunate luck to share a name with "T Kennedy," an alias once used by a person someone decided should be on the list.
There is no recourse for those on the list, and their stories quickly take on a Kafkaesque tone. People can be put on the list for any reason; no standards exist. There's no ability to review any evidence against you, or even confirm that you are actually on the list.
And, for most people, there's no way to get off the list or to "prove" once and for all that they're not whoever the list is really looking for. It took Kennedy three weeks to get his name off the list. People without his political pull have spent years futilely trying to clear their names.
There's something distinctly un-American about a secret government blacklist, with no right of appeal or judicial review. Even worse, there's evidence that it's being used as a political harassment tool: environmental activists, peace protesters, and anti-free-trade activists have all found themselves on the list.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2003
- Messages
- 20,206
One might take a different view of events.
1. "It's not important if it's true. It's important that the accusation is made and publicized."
All that is demonstrated is that some persons are "on a list" for openly opposing a national policy in place for generations - recruting for the Armed Forces. The rest is accusations by partisans.
2. Big deal. There is no right under the law to be ignored when one publically demonstrates. In fact, the purpose of demonstrating is to be noticed: "We publicized our event widely beforehand." But the "S" word is SO MUCH MORE DRAMATIC.
"90,000 Denver Fans Spy on Team While It Meets Pittsburgh Representatives.
Pictures Taken. Samples of Player's Handwriting Sought. "
And face it, the press release is just that - more publicity for their point-of-view. They were grinning when they composed it.
3. We are involved in a form of war.
People are inconvenienced.
Even Teddy Kennedy was inconvenienced.
Life goes on.
Government is often clumsy. It a big organization. But imagine what CBS (ir ABS or NBS) would say if a "known terrorist" flew to N.Y. and blew up CBS HQ? "Bush [It's always him personally.] allows known terrorist to fly to U.S.!!!!"
And "environmental activists" or "anti free trade activists"? Would that be the ELF crowd or those mobs in black throwing bombs and breaking in windows? I hope someone is keeping track of them.
Remember, HD, to ELF you are an "oppressor." FREE THE GOATS!
1. "It's not important if it's true. It's important that the accusation is made and publicized."
All that is demonstrated is that some persons are "on a list" for openly opposing a national policy in place for generations - recruting for the Armed Forces. The rest is accusations by partisans.
2. Big deal. There is no right under the law to be ignored when one publically demonstrates. In fact, the purpose of demonstrating is to be noticed: "We publicized our event widely beforehand." But the "S" word is SO MUCH MORE DRAMATIC.
"90,000 Denver Fans Spy on Team While It Meets Pittsburgh Representatives.
Pictures Taken. Samples of Player's Handwriting Sought. "And face it, the press release is just that - more publicity for their point-of-view. They were grinning when they composed it.
3. We are involved in a form of war.
People are inconvenienced.
Even Teddy Kennedy was inconvenienced.
Life goes on.
Government is often clumsy. It a big organization. But imagine what CBS (ir ABS or NBS) would say if a "known terrorist" flew to N.Y. and blew up CBS HQ? "Bush [It's always him personally.] allows known terrorist to fly to U.S.!!!!"
And "environmental activists" or "anti free trade activists"? Would that be the ELF crowd or those mobs in black throwing bombs and breaking in windows? I hope someone is keeping track of them.
Remember, HD, to ELF you are an "oppressor." FREE THE GOATS!
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2002
- Messages
- 1,101
hollowdweller, I am sure you are one of those communist liberals 
Our government has been monitoring political demonstrations ever since. This is getting normal these days. Scary thing is, we're all getting used to it. What's even more scary - if you complain about it, you are an enemy of the state - either you're with us, or against us.
Keno
Our government has been monitoring political demonstrations ever since. This is getting normal these days. Scary thing is, we're all getting used to it. What's even more scary - if you complain about it, you are an enemy of the state - either you're with us, or against us.
Keno
Without a Patriot Act, and without modern electronic eavesdropping, and in an era where search laws were narrow and more vigorously enforced, the FBI and the US government pretty much got rid of both the Communist Party and the Klu Klux Klan. They did so illegally, and probably criminally.
Clinton wasn't a factor. Either was ELF or Bush.
We ought to take a trip down memory lane. Does anyone recall the WWl vets that marched on Washington because the government reneged on contractual obligations, how they were disbanded and beaten up?
Does anyone remember the modern day Wounded Knee, where the FBI invited local ranchers to stop by after work and take a few shots at bad ndn's holed up in a Fed building? They did this before the rules of engagment were rewritten after Weaver....oh yeah, those pesky rules of engagment...under the old rules, they really weren't allowed to murder Weaver's wife, but we're assured that will ever happen again, because we got NEW rules.
All I'm saying is that not a lot has changed. Better mass communicaton through the internet and cable and satellite has probably helped curtail goverment abuse...at least the abuse we know about.
Did I remember to say that I actually love the US but do not always love the actions of my Goverment?
And I'd better say that I'm peace loving and voted for Bush. That's B U S H, in case any one is 'listening"
Poor John Lennon...it's really not paranoia when they really are out to get you!
munk
Clinton wasn't a factor. Either was ELF or Bush.
We ought to take a trip down memory lane. Does anyone recall the WWl vets that marched on Washington because the government reneged on contractual obligations, how they were disbanded and beaten up?
Does anyone remember the modern day Wounded Knee, where the FBI invited local ranchers to stop by after work and take a few shots at bad ndn's holed up in a Fed building? They did this before the rules of engagment were rewritten after Weaver....oh yeah, those pesky rules of engagment...under the old rules, they really weren't allowed to murder Weaver's wife, but we're assured that will ever happen again, because we got NEW rules.
All I'm saying is that not a lot has changed. Better mass communicaton through the internet and cable and satellite has probably helped curtail goverment abuse...at least the abuse we know about.
Did I remember to say that I actually love the US but do not always love the actions of my Goverment?
And I'd better say that I'm peace loving and voted for Bush. That's B U S H, in case any one is 'listening"
Poor John Lennon...it's really not paranoia when they really are out to get you!
munk
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 19,711
This thread is great. I'm pretty middle right politically, but I agree equally with HD and Thomas on different points. However, one must consider we are at WAR. The constitution has always had to be more plastic during a time of war, and there should be no apologies for it. As for spying on demonstrators though, and people opposed to the presidents policies, it sounds a lot like old King George would have behaved. I'm pro Bush, but I'm also very much for small weak federal govt. Bad Bush, bad. I'm not into those orginazitions and their points of view, but damnit give them the leeway to demonstrate without spying on them. If I catch a US spy in my home stealing my damn addressbook I'm going to shoot him in the face, and his family can kiss my ass.
That's alright Andy; don't sugar coat it.....
>>>>>>>
You know, one of the hardest things for me is to imagine a nationwide gun confiscation, and that the agents serving the orders have families too.
That's one best reason why we should never let it get that far. Keep guns legal and get the Second Amendment declared an individual right by the Supreme Court.
I'm more than a little afraid they will not do that, however.
munk
>>>>>>>
You know, one of the hardest things for me is to imagine a nationwide gun confiscation, and that the agents serving the orders have families too.
That's one best reason why we should never let it get that far. Keep guns legal and get the Second Amendment declared an individual right by the Supreme Court.
I'm more than a little afraid they will not do that, however.
munk
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2003
- Messages
- 20,206
texalp said:
I have never found this observation of Ben's very useful because it begs the question: "essential"?
Also, he seems to be allowing wiggle room for "permanent" safety or "lots" of safety."
And Munk is so right. Nothing new here. My Mom's Dad left me a button that reads, "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe when Congress is in session." It's from the 1920's.
Always a tension between government and the individual.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2003
- Messages
- 20,206
aproy1101 said:
You're too late. The Articles of Confederation were ditched in favor of a strong centra; government.
. . .
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 19,711
munk said:
Sorry if I was a little too harsh there Munk. I think that's exactly what happened during the American Revolution, and civil war. Neighbors shooting at neighbors, and familys left fatherless. It's unfortunate, but its reality. I'd still have to shoot to kill. I just don't think our Govt has the right, and I have the duty. I hope it never happens too.
I think soft revolutions are the way to go. Not many get hurt but mass noncompliance makes the point. You have to win hearts and minds to do that. That's a little tough if one's world view has been filtered by ABC and the New York Times. But new outlets are rising, challenging the status quo of the information industries, and we are not stagnant.
Life is very twisted, hurtful and strange. Members of ELF and ALF think they work under a higher morality so the destruction and even loss of life is acceptable.
I don't want to shoot anyone in my livingroom. But if enough people say; 'you can have my guns from my cold dead fingers' there's a good chance 'they' won't come to get them.
We need hard noses to win.
I have nothing profound to say. No man can sort all this out. I end up turning it over to God.
I think if we can keep the internet relatively free, we have one very useful tool for helping.
No, I don't want to shoot anyone in my livingroom, and everyone's family counts.
munk
Life is very twisted, hurtful and strange. Members of ELF and ALF think they work under a higher morality so the destruction and even loss of life is acceptable.
I don't want to shoot anyone in my livingroom. But if enough people say; 'you can have my guns from my cold dead fingers' there's a good chance 'they' won't come to get them.
We need hard noses to win.
I have nothing profound to say. No man can sort all this out. I end up turning it over to God.
I think if we can keep the internet relatively free, we have one very useful tool for helping.
No, I don't want to shoot anyone in my livingroom, and everyone's family counts.
munk
- Joined
- Feb 23, 1999
- Messages
- 4,855
aproy1101 said:
Before this "War on Terrorism" we had a "War on Drugs." The War on Drugs was used to justify no-knock searches where resisters were shot before any warrants could be displayed. The War on Terrorism is now being used to justify additional erosions of our civil liberties. I'll bring to your attention that congress declared war in neither of these instances. Another thing that strikes me as strange is that drugs are inantimate objects, and terrorism is a tactic. We seem to be significantly expanding our definitions of what wars for which it is justifiable to sacrifice our liberties are. Shall we next expect an undeclared "War on Titanium" or a "War on Pincer attacks?"
Perhaps a more realistic expectation than a war on titanium would be something like a "War on Bird Flu" in which we are required to give up various additional liberties in exchange for "maintaining the security of our great nation."
I expect our nation will always face challenges, but I have reservations about relinquishing our civil liberties to meet them.
Azis said:
I've wondered what kind of file I have. I called Red Flower just about every day for over a year and a half while she was in exile in Beijing. I might have a whole shelf at FBI HQ devoted to transcriptions of those calls. I can just imagine a henpecked FBI or CIA agent with headphones on, listening wistfully to our calls day after day and dreading the time he has to take off his headphones and drive home to his shrewish wife.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2003
- Messages
- 20,206
aproy1101 said:
If a government employee is in your home, odds are pretty good that he was ordered to be there. In fact, despite all the drama, odds are he has a legal right to be there by warrent or exigent circumstances.
In fact, more likely the guy you discover prowling around your house will be an drugie looking for something to steal -- odds are he's under 25. (What? You ask for ID and only shoot him in the face if he is a government employee?)
In any event, the law -- society -- says you cannot shoot him in the face, whoever he is. But you do so anyway 'cause you have "rights" superior to the law. So you imagine. It's your "duty" to shot him in the face.
By parity of reasoning, it would be OK for his "family" to shoot you -- or your relatives -- in the face. No law. No legal rights. Just whoever can lay down the heaviest fire. If he was government, you will find that he has a large, well-armed "family" with a different concept of "duty."
That system of might-makes-right prevailed in the British Isles before William. There was no concept of 'crime." It was all personal. William legislated "morality" and made it stick. I have no desire to go back.
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2003
- Messages
- 13,182
I think in a large part Communisim was done in by the fact that the people in those countries had access to MORE information via global communications.
The KKK I think lost most of it's power for the same reason. As segregation began to break down people realized that black folks were not out to do in their way of life.
I am concerned about the level of political debate in the US and how the intelligence is used to form it. I'm not even going to address the role of intelligence in the lead up to the Iraq war. That will be sorted out eventually.
While I have no problem with them trying to intercept terrorists, the way we debate the issues has changed in our country.
In general the way one gets elected or wins a debate on an issue is not so much on the merits of that issue, but rather by shifting the debate to whether the person you are disagreeing with is a good person. For instance what did Dukkais stand for? Willie Horton "card carrying ACLU member" . Ann Richards was putting homosexuals in charge in Texas. Clinton was a womanizer. Mc Cain was unstable. Gore was a liar and untrustworthy. Kerry didn't earn his medals. About the only presidential race that's been free from this was Clinton Vs Dole, and I have a lot of respect for both of those guys in the way they ran that campaign.
I think encumbents already have the advantage without giving them the ability to potentially wiretap and spy on their political opponents to try to dig something up to discredit them. Not on the merits of their positions, but on their character.
While I think for sure we need to defeat terrorisim, I'm not sure that doing a lot of collateral damage and invading people's privacy is the way to go.
I personally kind of feel like we had the fall of Communisim. And it really turned out the communists weren't really that bent on the fall of Western Civilization as we thought they were. They were a lot more stupid and disorganized than we thought. More intent on preserving the status quo than in Global Domination.
When communisim fell there was a whole segment of politicians, lobbyists, and industries that lost money. These guys were on the outs.
However with 9/11 it gave all those guys a golden opportunity to take the term "communisim" cross it out, put in "terrorisim" and start making money again. I'm not saying that there are not real terrorists out there who want to do bad things. There are. What I am saying is the people in power now are using the issue to push a political and economic agenda that is not necessarily related to reducing terror, but more on making money and keeping themselves in power just like the old Commies.
What is sad in a way for me is that in a lot of ways the terrorist threat is a byproduct of us arming the Taliban and Bin Laden to fight the communists in Afghanistan. Because of our "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" policy. Also the CIA removed the elected leader of Iran because of pressure from the oil companies and put in a dictator, the Shah. Then when the people rose up and put in a repressive terrorist government, and they got into a fight with Iraq, we used the same policy to build up and aid Saddam, increasing his military power.I'm not saying we CAUSED all the problems, there are a lot of factors at work, but I'm saying we didn't really do anything to ward it off either.
I think that a very strong military and intelligence policy along with supporting leaders that are consistent with our values of freedom and democracy, along with promoting economic development and education in the mid east would go way farther toward both eliminating exsisting terrorists, and discouraging future terrorists, than our current policy of intrusive spying and blunt use of force.:thumbup: I don't think that if we changed the policy that it would instantly defeat terrorisim. It won't. But over time I believe it would have a greater impact.
The KKK I think lost most of it's power for the same reason. As segregation began to break down people realized that black folks were not out to do in their way of life.
I am concerned about the level of political debate in the US and how the intelligence is used to form it. I'm not even going to address the role of intelligence in the lead up to the Iraq war. That will be sorted out eventually.
While I have no problem with them trying to intercept terrorists, the way we debate the issues has changed in our country.
In general the way one gets elected or wins a debate on an issue is not so much on the merits of that issue, but rather by shifting the debate to whether the person you are disagreeing with is a good person. For instance what did Dukkais stand for? Willie Horton "card carrying ACLU member" . Ann Richards was putting homosexuals in charge in Texas. Clinton was a womanizer. Mc Cain was unstable. Gore was a liar and untrustworthy. Kerry didn't earn his medals. About the only presidential race that's been free from this was Clinton Vs Dole, and I have a lot of respect for both of those guys in the way they ran that campaign.
I think encumbents already have the advantage without giving them the ability to potentially wiretap and spy on their political opponents to try to dig something up to discredit them. Not on the merits of their positions, but on their character.
While I think for sure we need to defeat terrorisim, I'm not sure that doing a lot of collateral damage and invading people's privacy is the way to go.
I personally kind of feel like we had the fall of Communisim. And it really turned out the communists weren't really that bent on the fall of Western Civilization as we thought they were. They were a lot more stupid and disorganized than we thought. More intent on preserving the status quo than in Global Domination.
When communisim fell there was a whole segment of politicians, lobbyists, and industries that lost money. These guys were on the outs.
However with 9/11 it gave all those guys a golden opportunity to take the term "communisim" cross it out, put in "terrorisim" and start making money again. I'm not saying that there are not real terrorists out there who want to do bad things. There are. What I am saying is the people in power now are using the issue to push a political and economic agenda that is not necessarily related to reducing terror, but more on making money and keeping themselves in power just like the old Commies.
What is sad in a way for me is that in a lot of ways the terrorist threat is a byproduct of us arming the Taliban and Bin Laden to fight the communists in Afghanistan. Because of our "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" policy. Also the CIA removed the elected leader of Iran because of pressure from the oil companies and put in a dictator, the Shah. Then when the people rose up and put in a repressive terrorist government, and they got into a fight with Iraq, we used the same policy to build up and aid Saddam, increasing his military power.I'm not saying we CAUSED all the problems, there are a lot of factors at work, but I'm saying we didn't really do anything to ward it off either.
I think that a very strong military and intelligence policy along with supporting leaders that are consistent with our values of freedom and democracy, along with promoting economic development and education in the mid east would go way farther toward both eliminating exsisting terrorists, and discouraging future terrorists, than our current policy of intrusive spying and blunt use of force.:thumbup:
I don't think that if we changed the policy that it would instantly defeat terrorisim. It won't. But over time I believe it would have a greater impact.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2003
- Messages
- 20,206
The "art" of reducing your opponent to a negative "sound -bite" goes back a long way.
Tilden: "Rum, Romainsm, and Rebellion"
Taft "Fat"
Hoover "Caused the Depression"
Truman "Lost China"
Eisenhower "Always on vacation playing golf"
Goldwater 9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 BOOM
Humphrey "Chicago" "Viet Nam"
Ford "Clumsy" "Played football without a helmet" [honor grad of Michigan Law]
Carter "Southern Cracker" [a liberal label for a Phd in physics - but from the South ]
Regan "Senile"
Clinton "MonicaGate"
Dole "The Dole Gingrich Team" "Old"
Dean "Oooraw!!!"
Bush "dumb' [Harvard MBA]
Reality has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the tag applied.
As for "the enemy of my enemy," that's an old dilemma. We have lots of refugees from eastern Europe in the area. Several have remarked on the thousands of U.S.-made trucks that transported the invading Soviet troops into their countrues after WWII - Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, the Baltic nations. Dealing with the "Devil" is a risky business.
Tilden: "Rum, Romainsm, and Rebellion"
Taft "Fat"
Hoover "Caused the Depression"
Truman "Lost China"
Eisenhower "Always on vacation playing golf"
Goldwater 9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 BOOM
Humphrey "Chicago" "Viet Nam"
Ford "Clumsy" "Played football without a helmet" [honor grad of Michigan Law]
Carter "Southern Cracker" [a liberal label for a Phd in physics - but from the South
]Regan "Senile"
Clinton "MonicaGate"
Dole "The Dole Gingrich Team" "Old"
Dean "Oooraw!!!"
Bush "dumb' [Harvard MBA]
Reality has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the tag applied.
As for "the enemy of my enemy," that's an old dilemma. We have lots of refugees from eastern Europe in the area. Several have remarked on the thousands of U.S.-made trucks that transported the invading Soviet troops into their countrues after WWII - Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, the Baltic nations. Dealing with the "Devil" is a risky business.