Post 9/11 Security State
-
Well besides the jingoism of the glorious victory, I don't think he's off base.
If I may coin a phrase, " any crisis worth having is worth over reacting to. "
WSS
Well besides the jingoism of the glorious victory, I don't think he's off base.
If I may coin a phrase, " any crisis worth having is worth over reacting to. "
WSS
I'm not sure I see anything close to jingoism.
And I agree on the demagogues.
-
I like that old saying by Ben Franklin, "people willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both"
Slogans aside, what is it anyone expects freedom to do? Compared to other reasonably civilized country in what ways do we enjoy more liberty?
WSS
-Ben franklin: The only president of the united states who was never president of the united states...
Slogans aside, what is it anyone expects freedom to do? Compared to other reasonably civilized country in what ways do we enjoy more liberty?
WSS
-Ben franklin: The only president of the united states who was never president of the united states...
Well that's just it, other countries do not recognize human rights as policy. Our privacy and liberty are being compromised by total government control and it's getting more and more restrictive. You must be aware that violation of privacy and human rights have been codified into our federal laws. One of the latest, Prez Peace Prize insisted on getting legal extrajudicial execution. The law doesn't have limitations, US citizens can be legally executed now without due process on the word of the president.
For example, the TSA doesn't do a good job for all their invasive security theater. I've read about quality control where guns and things that look like bombs get through TSA security. I've read that the TSA is doing their thing at train and subway stations, and plan to take their activities literally onto our roads and highways.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
-
Freedom makes the world more peaceful. And, of course, freer. Those are good things.
-
Freedom makes the world more peaceful. And, of course, freer. Those are good things.
Freedom makes the world more peaceful. And, of course, freer. Those are good things.
Actually I think it's prosperity that makes the world more peaceful or at least wherever it exists.
WSS
-
Slogans aside, what is it anyone expects freedom to do? Compared to other reasonably civilized country in what ways do we enjoy more liberty?
WSS
-Ben franklin: The only president of the united states who was never president of the united states...
Well that's just it, other countries do not recognize human rights as policy. Our privacy and liberty are being compromised by total government control and it's getting more and more restrictive. You must be aware that violation of privacy and human rights have been codified into our federal laws. One of the latest, Prez Peace Prize insisted on getting legal extrajudicial execution. The law doesn't have limitations, US citizens can be legally executed now without due process on the word of the president.
For example, the TSA doesn't do a good job for all their invasive security theater. I've read about quality control where guns and things that look like bombs get through TSA security. I've read that the TSA is doing their thing at train and subway stations, and plan to take their activities literally onto our roads and highways.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Well that's just it, other countries do not recognize human rights as policy. Our privacy and liberty are being compromised by total government control and it's getting more and more restrictive. You must be aware that violation of privacy and human rights have been codified into our federal laws. One of the latest, Prez Peace Prize insisted on getting legal extrajudicial execution. The law doesn't have limitations, US citizens can be legally executed now without due process on the word of the president.
For example, the TSA doesn't do a good job for all their invasive security theater. I've read about quality control where guns and things that look like bombs get through TSA security. I've read that the TSA is doing their thing at train and subway stations, and plan to take their activities literally onto our roads and highways.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Which innocent u s citizens are we talking about that the president has murdered?
And, since you don't seem to trust a police officer as to whether or not to search you do trust the judgement of every judge who may be called upon for a warrant?
And I'd still like to see the list of civalized countries with many less freedoms then we have.
Don't miss understand, I don't think we are all that free and we are becoming less so in some ways but I don't think it's ever been much better, and has probably been a lot worse.
WSS
-
Freedom makes the world more peaceful. And, of course, freer. Those are good things.
Actually I think it's prosperity that makes the world more peaceful or at least wherever it exists.
WSS
Actually I think it's prosperity that makes the world more peaceful or at least wherever it exists.
WSS
Well, that's part of it, but it's obviously not an either/or, and one stems from the other. You can't have real prosperity without freedom. You want economic freedom and political freedom, and the two beget each other. The Chinese, for instance, are becoming more politically free and open as they become more economically free. Petro states, like Saudi Arabia, have pockets of prosperity and widespread poverty, with limited economic or political freedom.
Free markets, free elections, free press, human rights. You don't have to be against those just to have an argument or to try and be different. They're good things.
-
Well that's just it, other countries do not recognize human rights as policy. Our privacy and liberty are being compromised by total government control and it's getting more and more restrictive. You must be aware that violation of privacy and human rights have been codified into our federal laws. One of the latest, Prez Peace Prize insisted on getting legal extrajudicial execution. The law doesn't have limitations, US citizens can be legally executed now without due process on the word of the president.
For example, the TSA doesn't do a good job for all their invasive security theater. I've read about quality control where guns and things that look like bombs get through TSA security. I've read that the TSA is doing their thing at train and subway stations, and plan to take their activities literally onto our roads and highways.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Which innocent u s citizens are we talking about that the president has murdered?
And, since you don't seem to trust a police officer as to whether or not to search you do trust the judgement of every judge who may be called upon for a warrant?
And I'd still like to see the list of civalized countries with many less freedoms then we have.
Don't miss understand, I don't think we are all that free and we are becoming less so in some ways but I don't think it's ever been much better, and has probably been a lot worse.
WSS
Which innocent u s citizens are we talking about that the president has murdered?
And, since you don't seem to trust a police officer as to whether or not to search you do trust the judgement of every judge who may be called upon for a warrant?
And I'd still like to see the list of civalized countries with many less freedoms then we have.
Don't miss understand, I don't think we are all that free and we are becoming less so in some ways but I don't think it's ever been much better, and has probably been a lot worse.
WSS
The point isn't that he murdered an "innocent" US citizen. It's that there was no real legal process that adjudicated his guilt. The executive branch just said, "We've looked at it, and he's guilty, so we killed him." That's not the way it should be, and people are right to question it.
-
Which innocent u s citizens are we talking about that the president has murdered?
And, since you don't seem to trust a police officer as to whether or not to search you do trust the judgement of every judge who may be called upon for a warrant?
And I'd still like to see the list of civalized countries with many less freedoms then we have.
Don't miss understand, I don't think we are all that free and we are becoming less so in some ways but I don't think it's ever been much better, and has probably been a lot worse.
WSS
The point isn't that he murdered an "innocent" US citizen. It's that there was no real legal process that adjudicated his guilt. The executive branch just said, "We've looked at it, and he's guilty, so we killed him." That's not the way it should be, and people are right to question it.
The point isn't that he murdered an "innocent" US citizen. It's that there was no real legal process that adjudicated his guilt. The executive branch just said, "We've looked at it, and he's guilty, so we killed him." That's not the way it should be, and people are right to question it.
But that's exactly what it meant.
If in fact a man is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law killing him constitutes murdering an innocent man.
WSS
-
Well, no. They'd gone through a process that had declared him guilty of conspiring to commit acts of terrorism against America. It's just not one that involved any judge or jury that we know of.
There's a court you have to go to if you want to secretly wiretap Americans, for instance. There is no court you go to if the president wants to kill an American with a drone. They have some sort of "legal process." Whatever that was. We don't know.
I know you love to trust in government (except when you don't) but this is troublesome.
-
Well, no. They'd gone through a process that had declared him guilty of conspiring to commit acts of terrorism against America. It's just not one that involved any judge or jury that we know of.
There's a court you have to go to if you want to secretly wiretap Americans, for instance. There is no court you go to if the president wants to kill an American with a drone. They have some sort of "legal process." Whatever that was. We don't know.
I know you love to trust in government (except when you don't) but this is troublesome.
Well, no. They'd gone through a process that had declared him guilty of conspiring to commit acts of terrorism against America. It's just not one that involved any judge or jury that we know of.
There's a court you have to go to if you want to secretly wiretap Americans, for instance. There is no court you go to if the president wants to kill an American with a drone. They have some sort of "legal process." Whatever that was. We don't know.
I know you love to trust in government (except when you don't) but this is troublesome.
I'm not attacking your defending the government.
I assume there may have been u s citizens living in hiroshima or nagasaki.
WSS
-
Well, no. They'd gone through a process that had declared him guilty of conspiring to commit acts of terrorism against America. It's just not one that involved any judge or jury that we know of.
There's a court you have to go to if you want to secretly wiretap Americans, for instance. There is no court you go to if the president wants to kill an American with a drone. They have some sort of "legal process." Whatever that was. We don't know.
I know you love to trust in government (except when you don't) but this is troublesome.
I'm not attacking your defending the government.
I assume there may have been u s citizens living in hiroshima or nagasaki.
WSS
I'm not attacking your defending the government.
I assume there may have been u s citizens living in hiroshima or nagasaki.
WSS
I don't know what that has to do with this either.
All I'm saying is that when the executive branch wants to target an American citizen they believe is plotting terrorist acts against our government, and that this person is in a hostile foreign country and can't be apprehended, then they have to present the evidence of this person's guilt to some neutral arbiter and have them swear off on it. The Intelligence Committees should probably also be involved. They can't simply decide unilaterally that they've looked at the evidence and think it's okay by them.
-
Well that's just it, other countries do not recognize human rights as policy. Our privacy and liberty are being compromised by total government control and it's getting more and more restrictive. You must be aware that violation of privacy and human rights have been codified into our federal laws. One of the latest, Prez Peace Prize insisted on getting legal extrajudicial execution. The law doesn't have limitations, US citizens can be legally executed now without due process on the word of the president.
For example, the TSA doesn't do a good job for all their invasive security theater. I've read about quality control where guns and things that look like bombs get through TSA security. I've read that the TSA is doing their thing at train and subway stations, and plan to take their activities literally onto our roads and highways.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Which innocent u s citizens are we talking about that the president has murdered?
And, since you don't seem to trust a police officer as to whether or not to search you do trust the judgement of every judge who may be called upon for a warrant?
And I'd still like to see the list of civalized countries with many less freedoms then we have.
Don't miss understand, I don't think we are all that free and we are becoming less so in some ways but I don't think it's ever been much better, and has probably been a lot worse.
WSS
<br /><b><br /> Which innocent u s citizens are we talking about that the president has murdered? <br /><br /> And, since you don't seem to trust a police officer as to whether or not to search you do trust the judgement of every judge who may be called upon for a warrant? <br /><br /> And I'd still like to see the list of civalized countries with many less freedoms then we have. <br /><br /> Don't miss understand, I don't think we are all that free and we are becoming less so in some ways but I don't think it's ever been much better, and has probably been a lot worse.<br />WSS </b><br />
<br /><br /><br />No wait, I posted the Fourth Amendment to contrast what the TSA are doing.
Fourth Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I don't think it matters which US citizens the president has ordered or will order to be executed. Without due process extrajudicial execution at the president's order violates the Bill of Rights.
You may or may not agree with my opinion that other countries do not recognize human rights as policy. I was thinking of our Bill of Rights and our Constitution, which I believe surpass any other country on human rights.
-
Yes that was so the king couldn't requisition your farm food horses and weapons for his soldiers.
In other words take your property for the good of the kingdom.
I think we use neutered that one many years ago don't you think?
Eminent domain ring a bell?
WSS
-
Yes that was so the king couldn't requisition your farm food horses and weapons for his soldiers.
In other words take your property for the good of the kingdom.
I think we use neutered that one many years ago don't you think?
Eminent domain ring a bell?
WSS
Yes that was so the king couldn't requisition your farm food horses and weapons for his soldiers.
In other words take your property for the good of the kingdom.
I think we use neutered that one many years ago don't you think?
Eminent domain ring a bell?
WSS
No it's not. There's a section specific to quartering a foreign soldier, and that's the part that you're talking about. That's the antiquated part.
To say that the 4th amendment of the Constitution was only written so the king couldn't take your food and horses is a complete, willful misreading of the original Constitution, and everything that's come since.
Come on, man.
-
Yes that was so the king couldn't requisition your farm food horses and weapons for his soldiers.
In other words take your property for the good of the kingdom.
I think we use neutered that one many years ago don't you think?
Eminent domain ring a bell?
WSS
<br /><b><br /> Yes that was so the king couldn't requisition your farm food horses and weapons for his soldiers. <br /> In other words take your property for the good of the kingdom.<br /> I think we use neutered that one many years ago don't you think?<br /> Eminent domain ring a bell?<br />WSS </b><br />
<br /><br /><br />You might include eminent domain as part of the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth. The Fifth Amendment requires "just compensation" for private property taken for public use.
-
<br /><b><br /> Yes that was so the king couldn't requisition your farm food horses and weapons for his soldiers. <br /> In other words take your property for the good of the kingdom.<br /> I think we use neutered that one many years ago don't you think?<br /> Eminent domain ring a bell?<br />WSS </b><br />
<br /><br /><br />You might include eminent domain as part of the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth. The Fifth Amendment requires "just compensation" for private property taken for public use.
<br /><br /><br />
You might include eminent domain as part of the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth. The Fifth Amendment requires "just compensation" for private property taken for public use.
It does indeed.
And who decides just compensation, the owner for the usurper?
Also it occurs to me that was the afterthought. When the founders decided it wasn't such a bad idea to take what they wanted they added The just compensation bit.
WSS
-
<br /><br /><br />
You might include eminent domain as part of the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth. The Fifth Amendment requires "just compensation" for private property taken for public use.
It does indeed.
And who decides just compensation, the owner for the usurper?
Also it occurs to me that was the afterthought. When the founders decided it wasn't such a bad idea to take what they wanted they added The just compensation bit.
WSS
It does indeed.
And who decides just compensation, the owner for the usurper?
Also it occurs to me that was the afterthought. When the founders decided it wasn't such a bad idea to take what they wanted they added The just compensation bit.
WSS
As far as I know the property owner gets a take it or leave it offer from the government.
-
It does indeed.
And who decides just compensation, the owner for the usurper?
Also it occurs to me that was the afterthought. When the founders decided it wasn't such a bad idea to take what they wanted they added The just compensation bit.
WSS
As far as I know the property owner gets a take it or leave it offer from the government.
-
And king george's men might toss a hand full of coppers on the floor as they left with the horses.
WSS
OK yea, we know that and now everybody on this thread is aware of it too.
But what about post 9/11 and the security state? I mean, can you believe anything Big Sis says about security?
-
And king george's men might toss a hand full of coppers on the floor as they left with the horses.
WSS
OK yea, we know that and now everybody on this thread is aware of it too.
But what about post 9/11 and the security state? I mean, can you believe anything Big Sis says about security?
OK yea, we know that and now everybody on this thread is aware of it too.
But what about post 9/11 and the security state? I mean, can you believe anything Big Sis says about security?
I don't know.
There is really nothing in the patriot act that ruffles my feathers.
I realize a lot of folks get up in arms about the freedoms they are losing.
I don't think we've ever really had any.
And I'll repeat I don't think any other reasonably civilized country is it any better or worse.
People like to band together in groups for power governmental or otherwise.
Weather it's village council or the u s senate they enjoy pushing people around.
I'm just saying I doubt it there's even 1 of the bill of rights that hasn't been compromised.
Remember animal farm?
Every so often the rules painted on the barn wall seemed to have changed.
Maybe that sounds cynical, but it's true, and I don't really lose much sleep over it anyway.
Go through your city or towns rules and regulations sometime and tell me what percentage is chicken shit. Multiply that by the mega thousands for u s government.
But back to the topic, sure, the t s a regulations are a pain in the ass and not very effective.
Bureaucracy in action!
WSS
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login